[License-review] Submitting CC0 for OSI approval
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
> 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