[License-discuss] [License-review] CC0 incompliant with OSD on patents, [was: MXM compared to CC0 ]

[Jim Jagielski]

On Mar 8, 2012, at 3:51 PM, Rick Moen wrote:

> 
> Pardon my interjecting, but I think you may have misread Russ's point.
> I _believe_ he was saying that, if a codebase is encumbered by patents
> not available royalty-free (e.g., only under 'RAND' terms), then the
> software in question ends up being effectively proprietary in
> jurisdictions where the patent is enforceable, irrespective of the
> software's licence -- as long as the software continues to implement the
> patented method, anyway:  Derivatives that no longer do that would be 
> open source if the licensing and other relevant facts permit.
> 

BTW: How is this different from, say, the US export control provisions?
In both cases, a codebase is encumbered by external, and "localized"
restrictions. So does this mean that software distributed out of
the US, no matter the OSI license, isn't "really" open source?