<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;
text-decoration:none none;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>Ben Tilly wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>> </span>According to the statute as shown at <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/35/271">https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/35/271</a>, patent law covers selling and importing. Which by my reading means that it does impact distribution of software, even if you do not run it.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>I don't read the law quite that way. Certainly selling or importing a product that contains patented software for its intended use would be infringing. But merely importing or distributing source code that is licensed under CC0 does not infringe. I'd call it free speech.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>Other opinions?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>/Larry<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'> Ben Tilly [mailto:btilly@gmail.com] <br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, March 7, 2017 4:27 PM<br><b>To:</b> Lawrence Rosen <lrosen@rosenlaw.com>; License Discuss <license-discuss@opensource.org><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [License-discuss] patent rights and the OSD<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><b><i>[<LER>] </i></b> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>IANALTINLA and all that.<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 3:57 PM, Lawrence Rosen <<a href="mailto:lrosen@rosenlaw.com" target="_blank">lrosen@rosenlaw.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in'><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in'><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>Christopher Sean Morrison wrote:</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in'><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>> </span>Software patents are terrible in part because they pertain to the source code itself, thus affecting the distribution terms on that code.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>Patents don't pertain to source code or to code distribution, at least not in legal terms of direct patent infringement. Patent rights pertain to the "use" of the software, not its written description.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>Patents are already described as publicly as open source code (see USPTO.gov), but one is under patent law and the other under copyright law. This openness of publication under patent law is on purpose, although with the flood of software patents and their obscure language, this publication openness is not very helpful to creators of copyrighted software. But this doesn't affect source code or its distribution, certainly not literally in the many jurisdictions where the patents are ineffective, nor in the U.S. </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>Where this discussion can go awry is when we interpret the OSD too broadly with respect to patents. The OSD can be clarified or amended, but at its birth nobody fully understood software patents. After reading the CC letter to the White House (</span><a href="https://github.com/WhiteHouse/source-code-policy/issues/149" target="_blank">https://github.com/WhiteHouse/source-code-policy/issues/149</a>), I can agree it is a complicated problem. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>/Larry</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in'><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'> License-discuss [mailto:<a href="mailto:license-discuss-bounces@opensource.org" target="_blank">license-discuss-bounces@opensource.org</a>] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Christopher Sean Morrison<br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, March 7, 2017 3:10 PM<br><b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:license-discuss@opensource.org" target="_blank">license-discuss@opensource.org</a><br><b>Cc:</b> License Discuss <<a href="mailto:license-discuss@opensource.org" target="_blank">license-discuss@opensource.org</a>><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [License-discuss] patent rights and the OSD</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in'> <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in'> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:1.0in'><br>On Mar 07, 2017, at 04:45 PM, Ben Tilly <<a href="mailto:btilly@gmail.com" target="_blank">btilly@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in'>When we talk about whether a software license is OSD compliant, we are only addressing the question of whether this license restricts software under copyright law in a way that violates the OSD.<o:p></o:p></p></div></div></blockquote></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in'> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in'>I hear you, but I don't see where the OSD says that. It does not mention copyright law. The OSD annotated or otherwise doesn't even mention the word 'copy'. It (specifically?) says "the distribution terms". <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in'> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in'>While I certainly can understand the perspective that there are other laws, regulations, and factors, not all of them affect distribution terms of the software -- they are restrictions on me, my assets, my situation, not the software. Software patents are terrible in part because they pertain to the source code itself, thus affecting the distribution terms on that code.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in'> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in'>In a way, it's convenient that the OSD does not specifically call out copyright and speaks generically. It's a testament of forethought (or luck) of the original authors.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in'> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in'>Cheers!<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in'>Sean<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in'> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;margin-left:1.0in'> <o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div></div></div></div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in'><br>_______________________________________________<br>License-discuss mailing list<br><a href="mailto:License-discuss@opensource.org">License-discuss@opensource.org</a><br><a href="https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss" target="_blank">https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss</a><o:p></o:p></p></blockquote></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></body></html>