For Approval: Broad Institute Public License (BIPL)

Wilson, Andrew andrew.wilson at
Fri Jul 14 19:39:02 UTC 2006

Matthew Flaschen wrote:

> IANAL, but it seems clear the patent claims *are* owned by MIT, though

> not controlled by them.  Thus, they are unfortunately "owned or 
> controlled" and would necessarily have to be granted.  This is
> for cases where a company is an exclusive licensee, while MIT is the 
> exclusive licensor.

The exact definition of Licensable in CDDL is
"means having the right to grant."  If the Institute
has already granted exclusivity to a 3rd party,
seems to me that patent is not Licensable since
the Institute has no further rights to grant.

IANAL, etc., etc.

Andy Wilson
Intel Open Source Technology Center

More information about the License-discuss mailing list