[License-review] Submitting CC0 for OSI approval

[Bruce Perens]

On 02/17/2012 05:35 PM, Rick Moen wrote:
> Bruce, you were comparing it (invidiously) to BSD licensing. Am I 
> missing something, or aren't all variants of BSD in the exact same 
> boat, regarding implied patent licensing pursuant to theories of legal 
> estoppel, equitable estoppel, etc.?
I'm dubious. In the case of a license to use, for example the BSD, it's 
equitable estoppel by acquiescence. By permitting someone to carry out 
an action (acquiescing to the action), you are estopped from prosecuting 
that person for carrying out the action, and thus it is implied that 
your permission contained, by implication, all rights necessary to carry 
out the action that you could grant. This including rights to exercise 
those patent claims that are implemented in the version of the software 
you licensed.

CC0 is an abandonment of rights, and then a backup license that would be 
considered acquiescence, but which is only in consideration /if your 
rights were not abandoned./

So, I am reading this as either an abandonment of rights OR 
acquiescence, but not both.

     Thanks

     Bruce
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20120217/07b92b2d/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: bruce.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 266 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20120217/07b92b2d/attachment.vcf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4447 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20120217/07b92b2d/attachment.p7s>