[License-review] ModelGo Attribution License, Version 2.0 FINAL CALL FOR COMMENTS

[McCoy Smith]

On 9/7/2026 10:06 PM, Moming Duan wrote:
>
> *Q3 (termination directed only at the Licensor; patent claim 
> terminating the copyright grant):*
>
>   * McCoy, May 2025: concluded "not an OSD violation, but an uptake
>     issue" [9]
>   * Moming, Jun 2025: the automatic-termination change [10]
>   * OpenMDW thread, Aug-Sep 2026: precedents for patent claims
>     terminating copyright grants [11]; Yokoi-san's three-axis framing [12]
>
This response only addresses one of my concerns with the termination 
provision (the latter in the parenthetical). Let me spell out the 
concern in more detail:

ModelGo Attribution allows for termination upon a patent assertion. But 
is says:

"This License shall terminate immediately if You breach any material 
term and/or condition of this License, or if You initiate any legal 
action *against the Licensor* alleging that the
Licensed Materials and/or Derivative Materials infringe any patent 
worldwide. Sections 3, 4 and 6 shall survive the termination of this 
License."

"Licensor" means the rights owner that is granting the License.

That means a patent assertion against a *Licensee* (someone who has 
received and is using the licensed code, but has not granted any license 
too it) does not trigger termination of the license. This puts Licensors 
& Licensees in different positions vis a vis patent assertions, and 
therefore arguably violates OSD 5  ("No Discrimination Against Persons 
or Groups
The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons.").

Note that of the other licenses that have termination as the result of 
patent assertions, the triggering event is a patent assertion against 
the licensed work, not any particular party:

Apache-2.0: "If You institute patent litigation against *any entity* 
(including a cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) *alleging that 
the Work or a Contribution incorporated within the Work constitutes 
direct or contributory patent infringement*"

MPL-2.0: " If You initiate litigation against *any entity* by asserting 
a patent infringement claim (excluding declaratory judgment actions, 
counter-claims, and cross-claims) *alleging that a Contributor Version 
directly or indirectly infringes any patent*"

EPL-2.0: "If Recipient institutes patent litigation against *any entity* 
(including a cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) *alleging that 
the Program itself (excluding combinations of the Program with other 
software or hardware) infringes such Recipient’s patent(s)*"

GPL-3.0: "you may not initiate litigation (including a cross-claim or 
counterclaim in a lawsuit) *alleging that any patent claim is infringed 
by making, using, selling, offering for sale, or importing the Program 
or any portion of it.*"

I wonder if you might wish to change the termination language to be more 
consistent with how these other licenses approach it, and whether others 
have concerns as to whether the current formulation causes a OSD 5 (or 
other OSD provision) problem.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20260916/11252106/attachment.htm>