[License-review] Request for consultation with CC on patent issue

[Henrik Ingo]

Hi Chuck

Thank you, your response was genuinly helpful in understanding why
someone would read the CC0 text differently than I do.

On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 10:50 PM, Chuck Swiger <chuck at codefab.com> wrote:
>> The Related Rights are enumerated in §1 and do *not* include patent
>> rights. They are only so called "Neighboring rights" ie
>> "copyright-like" rights.
>
> That's right.  But that's also why the phrase quoted above doesn't end with "all of Affirmer's Copyright and Related Rights", but continues with "and associated claims and causes of action, whether now known or unknown (including existing as well as future claims and causes of action)...."
>

"surrenders all of Affirmer's Copyright and Related Rights and
associated claims and causes of action, whether now known or unknown
(including existing as well as future claims and causes of action)"

Ok. So I was reading "associated claims" as associated with the
Copyright, you are reading it as any claims associated with the work
(including relevant patent claims).

I suppose my reading is influenced by the words in 4a and wouldn't go
further than that in saying you or me are more right or wrong. (I wish
you were right, but I also wish this issue could be clarified.)

>
> The Affirmer may indeed retain patent rights, if any.  But they've also promised not to make a claim with regard to the Work they've placed into the public domain and/or under the CC0 license clause 3 fallback.
>

Of course. There's no suggestion they should go beyond that or OSI
should demand more than that.

> However, with regard to the Work placed under CC0, the Affirmer has explicitly chosen that "the public can reliably and without fear of later claims of infringement build upon, modify, incorporate in other works, reuse and redistribute as freely as possible in any form whatsoever and for any purposes, including without limitation commercial purposes...."
>

Ok, if you come to this from the introductory text, then I agree that
you are entitled to an assumption the Affirmer cannot make *any*
claims, including patent claims. Otherwise the above wouldn't be true.

In essence, the "without fear of later claims" text  expresses the
same intent as the OSD #7.

> I think that's self-explanatory, but I'd be happy to hear how you'd change the CC0 text to make things more clear?

I think the exclusion of patents in 4a, without further clarifcation
contradicts the words you quoted above, and they are part of the
license whereas your quoted words are part of the introduction. I
would:

either have 4a removed; or

make 4a say something like "While Affirmer has affirmed not to assert
any claims and legal actions with regard to the Work, no trademark or
patent rights are themselves ..."

(but here really I would prefer a lawyer to be involved, anyway...)

henrik
-- 
henrik.ingo at avoinelama.fi
+358-40-8211286 skype: henrik.ingo irc: hingo
www.openlife.cc

My LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=9522559