ensource.org] On
> Behalf Of Lawrence Rosen
> Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2017 4:57 PM
> To: license-discuss@opensource.org
> Cc: Lawrence Rosen
> Subject: Re: [License-discuss] [Non-DoD Source] patent rights and the OSD
>
> All active links contained in this email were disabled.
patent troll before they do a FOSS release.
From: Christopher Sean Morrison mailto:brl...@mac.com>>
Date: Tuesday, Mar 07, 2017, 5:57 PM
To: license-discuss@opensource.org
mailto:license-discuss@opensource.org>>
Subject: Re: [License-discuss] [Non-DoD Source] patent rights and the OSD
By
From: Christopher Sean Morrison mailto:brl...@mac.com>>
Date: Tuesday, Mar 07, 2017, 5:57 PM
To: license-discuss@opensource.org
mailto:license-discuss@opensource.org>>
Subject: Re: [License-discuss] [Non-DoD Source] patent rights and the OSD
On Mar 07, 2017, at 04:09 PM, Ric
On Mar 07, 2017, at 04:09 PM, Richard Fontana wrote:
On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 03:55:37PM +, Christopher Sean Morrison wrote:
Of particular significance, it calls into question whether there are
any OSI-approved licenses that specifically exclude patent rights in
the current portfolio or
Europe?
/Larry
-Original Message-
From: License-discuss [mailto:license-discuss-boun...@opensource.org] On Behalf
Of Richard Fontana
Sent: Tuesday, March 7, 2017 1:09 PM
To: license-discuss@opensource.org
Subject: Re: [License-discuss] [Non-DoD Source] patent rights and the OSD
On Tue,
On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 03:55:37PM +, Christopher Sean Morrison wrote:
> Of particular significance, it calls into question whether there are
> any OSI-approved licenses that specifically exclude patent rights in
> the current portfolio or whether CC0 would be the first of its
> kind. If ther
> -Original Message-
> From: License-discuss [mailto:license-discuss-boun...@opensource.org] On
> Behalf Of Christopher Sean Morrison
> Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2017 10:56 AM
> To: license-discuss@opensource.org
> Subject: Re: [License-discuss] [Non-DoD Source] patent
On Mar 07, 2017, at 09:07 AM, "Karan, Cem F CIV USARMY RDECOM ARL (US)" wrote:I personally think that software that is distributed without a patent license or a waiver of patent claims is not Open Source (this is my opinion, and not a Government position).It certainly fails a smell test in modern
I personally think that software that is distributed without a patent license
or a waiver of patent claims is not Open Source (this is my opinion, and not a
Government position). It prevents people from freely modifying the code. That
said, I don't have a problem with someone holding a softwar
9 matches
Mail list logo