[License-review] Submitting CC0 for OSI approval
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
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