For Approval: Broad Institute Public License (BIPL)

Matthew Flaschen superm40 at
Fri Jul 14 20:04:27 UTC 2006

Lawrence Rosen wrote:
> 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 intended
>>for cases where a company is an exclusive licensee, while MIT is the
>>exclusive licensor.
> Perhaps you're right. If so, that's an easy change to make and they are free
> to make it. :-) /Larry

I agree; it would be preferrable to approve a license like that.  We can 
be sure it is still OSI-compliant; there would still be license 
proliferation, but at least it would be mitigated.

Matthew Flaschen

More information about the License-discuss mailing list