Intel's proposed BSD + Patent License

Forrest J. Cavalier III mibsoft at
Fri Nov 2 23:20:52 UTC 2001

Russ Nelson wrote:
>Forrest  > Tell me why you have to put the OSI's good name on this.
> The only way we can reject a license is to point to the OSD term which 
> it violates.

The license under discussion violates FSF Freedom 0,
   The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).

If the OSD cannot discern it as unfree, the OSD
must be amended to safeguard the right to "use" as well.

It has been about a year since someone else tried to
drive a poor license through this loophole.  They wanted
to require an end-user license fee for each copy. Since the
OSD was silent on use, they figured it was OSS.

Their license had other problems, and after a lot of
flames and second and third attempts, they faded away
(and I don't recall hearing anything about them at
the last LWCE NYC that they expected to attend and
announce their new whatever it was.)

license-discuss archive is at

More information about the License-discuss mailing list