Exactly. Anyone that gets something from the USG deserves to know that they won't be facing a patent lawsuit from any of the contributors.
Thanks, Cem Karan > -----Original Message----- > From: License-discuss [mailto:license-discuss-boun...@opensource.org] On > Behalf Of Chris DiBona > Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2016 6:12 PM > To: license-discuss@opensource.org > Cc: Lawrence Rosen <lro...@rosenlaw.com> > Subject: Re: [License-discuss] [Non-DoD Source] Re: [Non-DoD Source] Re: U.S. > Army Research Laboratory Open Source License (ARL OSL) > 0.4.0 > > All active links contained in this email were disabled. Please verify the > identity of the sender, and confirm the authenticity of all links > contained within the message prior to copying and pasting the address to a > Web browser. > > > ________________________________ > > > > > In military contracting , patent grants are key to the point where I wouldn't > consider a non patent granting license from, say, lockheed as > being open source at all. > > > On Aug 18, 2016 3:05 PM, "Tzeng, Nigel H." <nigel.tz...@jhuapl.edu < > Caution-mailto:nigel.tz...@jhuapl.edu > > wrote: > > > On 8/18/16, 3:57 PM, "License-discuss on behalf of Lawrence Rosen" > <license-discuss-boun...@opensource.org < > Caution-mailto:license-discuss-boun...@opensource.org > on behalf of > lro...@rosenlaw.com < Caution-mailto:lro...@rosenlaw.com > > > wrote: > > > >Nigel Tzeng wrote: > >> The issue here is for code that is potentially quite substantial. I > >>would think that would be a different scenario. > > > >If I include the works of Shakespeare in my software, it would of > course > >be substantial and yet still be public domain almost everywhere (?). > > If patents aren't a concern then okay. Copyright lasts longer than > patents so for anything that is in the public domain because of age then > no patents would still apply. > > There isn¹t a lot of code that has aged out. Only code written between > before 1963 and didn¹t get a renewal. > > _______________________________________________ > License-discuss mailing list > License-discuss@opensource.org < > Caution-mailto:License-discuss@opensource.org > > > Caution-https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss > < Caution-https://lists.opensource.org/cgi- > bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss > >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
