[License-discuss] Software, licenses, and patents

[Lawrence Rosen]

Jonathon, 

This double-negative in your email leaves me confused: "This isn't a case of where the developer is unaware of possible patents." 

In many situations, such as in Apache and W3C, a contributor has an obligation to the community to disclose what he or she knows. Secrets serve nobody. Disclose what you know. No negatives.

AS-IS and NO WARRANTY with respect to patents would then be appropriate.

/Larry


-----Original Message-----
From: jonathon [mailto:jonathon.blake at gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2015 1:53 PM
To: license-discuss at opensource.org
Subject: [License-discuss] Software, licenses, and patents

All:

Need some help.

Software was privately created.
Developer wants to release under the GNU GPL 3.0.
If you want to change the license, for your comments, do so.

Issue:
Developer is using systems, methods, and techniques that were described in the literature more than three decades ago (in some instances 400 years ago), except instead of using pen and paper, they are using software.

As best as can be determined, there are no patent issues with any libraries that are used.

As best as can be determined, there are no copyright/license issues with any of the libraries that are used.

Developer is not going to be responsible for claims of patent infringement by users.

Developer is not going to cover any court costs incurred by users, because of patent related litigation, or threats of such litigation.

Developer is emphatically not going to pay for the right to utilize any patents within the software.

Content created by the developer years before the patents were applied for, might have been the source of any patents that were granted.


Question:
Should developer make any notation about possible patents that the software _might_ infringe upon?

This isn't a case of where the developer is unaware of possible patents.
Nor is it a case of where the developer holds any patents.


jonathon