[License-review] Submitting CC0 for OSI approval

Rick Moen rick at linuxmafia.com
Sat Feb 18 01:35:56 UTC 2012

Quoting Bruce Perens (bruce at perens.com):

> On 02/17/2012 04:39 PM, Rick Moen wrote:
> >CC0 clauses 3 and 4, the 'public license fallback' and
> >'limitations and disclaimers', are to my eyes a competently
> >written and valid permissive licence drafted by competent
> >professionals.
> It could be entirely so, and still leave the patent issue open to
> hurt unwary developers. As far as I can see, the fallback doesn't
> prevent grantor's heirs and assigns from bringing patent action.

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 mean, one could argue that Larry's Academic Free License is a much
better choice, in that area, than either BSD or CC0 clauses 3 & 4, but 
you were specifically comparing the latter two.

More information about the License-review mailing list