[License-review] Submitting CC0 for OSI approval

Karl Fogel kfogel at red-bean.com
Sun Feb 19 20:16:44 UTC 2012

Russ Nelson <nelson at crynwr.com> writes:
>Bruce Perens writes:
> > On 02/19/2012 10:14 AM, Karl Fogel wrote:
> > > in any case MIT and BSD appear to be pretty clearly copyright-specific.
> > 
> > But this is ignoring equitable estoppel through acquiescence of use. 
> > That it exists is pretty well-accepted. If they had language explicitly 
> > restricting the grant to copyright, it would be otherwise.
>Except that MIT has denied the existence of a patent license according
>to Karl. 

Well, Bruce is reading the same license language I am, and coming to a
different interpretation -- one that I do not feel qualified to
contradict (I suspect no one really knows what a judge would say if
someone tried to claim that the MIT license included an implied patent
license... Which seems to be think your conclusion too).


>Would that denial hold up against an implicit license? Who knows. That
>is one of the reasons why OSI hasn't gotten involved in this mess
>before, and shouldn't now.

More information about the License-review mailing list