[License-review] Submitting CC0 for OSI approval

[Bruce Perens]

On 02/18/2012 08:09 PM, Karl Fogel wrote:
> So my feeling is, to reject CC0 because of clause 4a, we have to be
> *sure*  that clause 4a actually
>
>    * Increases a recipient's risk of being an infringement claim target,
>         -->  and/or -->
>    * Weakens a recipient's defense against an infringement claim.
More likely we reject CC0 because a dedication to the public domain 
weakens a recipient's defense from patent infringement when compared to 
the form of acquiescence in a use license.

There is a set of licenses that comply with the requirements of the OSD 
but would be a bad idea for anyone to use. OSI has mostly avoided 
certifying such licenses.

     Thanks

     Bruce
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20120218/11c65b52/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/20120218/11c65b52/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/20120218/11c65b52/attachment.p7s>