[License-discuss] Permissive but anti-patent license

Chad Perrin perrin at apotheon.com
Fri Jan 25 02:18:34 UTC 2013

On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 09:54:23AM +0000, John Funnell wrote:
> Dear all,
> GPL v2 and v3 have anti-patent clauses that says, in effect, that if
> anyone arranges a patent license for distribution of the code, they
> have to arrange that license for all possible downstream recipients of
> the code and derivatives.
> I would like to take this one step further so that the anti-patent
> clause covers use as well as distribution. I propose the license
> below, a BSD derivative.
> The aim, like GPL, is to drive a wedge between the software patent
> business and open software and the hope is to encourage the
> neutralisation (i.e. licensing for all) of critical patents that
> threaten popular free software.
> I am aware that the clause proposed only covers third-party patents:
> it might be worth rewording or including a clause to cover patents
> owned by the user/re-distributor themselves.
> I hope this makes sense. Please let me know if (a) there is an
> existing license that does this and (b) whether this would qualify as
> true open source.

I'm afraid I'm a month late here, but . . .


Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20130124/36ae97d1/attachment.sig>

More information about the License-discuss mailing list