For Approval: Broad Institute Public License (BIPL)
Matthew Seth Flaschen
superm40 at comcast.net
Thu Jul 13 20:17:28 UTC 2006
Russ Nelson wrote:
> If you can infringe a patent without knowing that you're doing it,
> then the patent system is broken.
Agreed, but as you say later, there's not much that can be immediately
done about this.
> I think that MIT needs to tell all its exclusive
> licensees "We intend to publish XYZ as open source. We don't think it
> infringes the patent we licensed to you. You have 30 days to review
> this software for infringements. After that time, we will release it
> as open source software."
The problem is, the patent licensees have no legal obligation to
cooperate with this. They can refuse to review the code and still sue
open source users and/or MIT later.
Regardless, I agree that we don't have to solve MIT's problem for them.
The license is extremely non-reciprocal and unlikely to be reused. I
think it should be rejected.
More information about the License-discuss