<div dir="ltr"><div>Hi all,</div><br><div class="gmail_quote gmail_quote_container"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Aug 19, 2026 at 4:40\u202fPM McCoy Smith <mccoy@lexpan.law> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><br>
So at least MPLv2 & GPLv3 (and maybe GPLv2?) give a (C) termination <br>
right upon patent assertions. CDDLv1.1 does as well (see Sec 6.2). So, <br>
at a minimum, I think we can conclude that a patent defensive <br>
termination clause that allows for termination of copyright rights isn't <br>
anomalous<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>However, I have still seen no evidence that there is an example of an OSI-approved license where copyright claims trigger any form of rights termination. As I recall (and I apologise for not having chapter and verse) any form of copyright grant revocation has been controversial in the past as it potentially removes Freedom 0 - I seem to recall attempts to claim that Freedom 0 is not an OSI matter when the discussion arose.</div><div><br></div><div>It seems to me that a license revoking Freedom 0 upon a copyright claim cannot assure software freedom. Other difficulties have been mentioned, but this seems fundamental.</div><div><br></div><div>Cheers</div><div><br></div><div>Simon</div><div>(in a private capacity)</div></div></div>