For approval: MXM Public license
matthew.flaschen at gatech.edu
Wed Apr 8 21:14:22 UTC 2009
John Cowan wrote:
> I don't think your cases about implicit licenses are on point, and the
> most I'm willing to say is that some licenses provide patent rights and
> some are silent on the subject. The water is muddy, but that is not
> my doing.
I was referring to those like our submitter and the Clear BSD folks
(http://labs.metacarta.com/license-explanation.html). But I object to
the idea that software is somehow an exception to the general principle
of implicit patent licenses.
>> Did I say anything about FOSS developers? Letting developers come up
>> with licenses without asking legal advice gives us things like the
>> Artistic License.
> ...which shares with the GPLv2 the virtue of actually having survived
> a court test.
In Artistic's case, on appeal and no thanks to the license writer.
More information about the License-review