On 3 Apr 2014 00:59, "John Cowan" <co...@mercury.ccil.org> wrote: > > Wilson, Andrew scripsit: > > > Interesting point, though. I'd speculate that if the embedded > > "public license fallback" inside CC0 is ever sent to OSI as a > > stand-alone license, it would be approved. It is mighty similar > > in effect to MIT/BSD/Apache, with the distinctive feature that it > > explicitly disclaims patent licensing, is clearly copyright-only, > > and therefore non-duplicative. > > I thought that was precisely why we rejected it. >
As I recall it was withdrawn by CC before we were forced to consider whether its explicit removal of any implied patent protection was in fact a breach of the OSD. S.
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
