I'm sure that everyone has done this already but no one posted that here - If you google for OIN, you can find interesting things:
http://www.itworld.com/open-source/117730/lawsuit-raises-questions-about-open-invention-network-linux-foundation In that article you can find this link: http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2010/08/oracle-sues-google-says-android.html On 27 October 2011 17:04, Kent Mein <m...@cs.umn.edu> wrote: > In reply to Ton Roosendaal (t...@blender.org): > >> From: Ton Roosendaal <t...@blender.org> >> To: bf-blender developers <bf-committers@blender.org> >> Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 11:13:28 +0200 >> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936) >> Subject: [Bf-committers] Open Invention Network >> Reply-To: bf-blender developers <bf-committers@blender.org> >> >> Hi all, >> >> I've been contacted by this organization: >> http://www.openinventionnetwork.com >> >> With the request if Blender Foundation would join as a (free, no >> costs) member. It's mainly meant as public endorsement from us for them. >> >> I don't have much time time to investigate their position in free/open >> matters. Advice or crits therefore is welcome :) >> >> Thanks, >> >> -Ton- >> > > Reading through their website kind of gave me the impression why would we > want to join this? Seems like something we don't want to get into. > > Looking at the comments about it on slashdot > (http://linux.slashdot.org/story/11/04/20/1642224/Linux-Patent-Protection-Network-Lures-Facebook-HP?utm_source%3Drss1.0%26utm_medium%3Dfeed) > I Really like the summary from this person, it's mid topic so it's a little > confusing but read on... :) > >> Re:Trust them as far as you can throw them (Score:5, Informative) >> by icebike (68054) on Wednesday April 20 2011, @02:09PM (#35883508) >> > And how do we know that they're not simply joining up to see what others >> > have there, to make it easier for them to win IP lawsuits? >> >> Most patent portfolios come with irrevocable commitments to allow any >> patent they submit to the portfolio to be used freely forever. >> This one apparently DOES NOT have such a commitment. >> >> From their Agreement: >> >> 1.1 Subject to Section 1.2(b), OIN, grants to You and Your Subsidiaries a >> royalty-free, worldwide, nonexclusive, non-transferable license under OIN >> Patents to make, have made, use, import, and Distribute any products or >> services. In addition to the foregoing and without limitation thereof, >> with respect only to the Linux System, the license granted herein >> includes the right to engage in activities that in the absence of this >> Agreement would constitute inducement to infringe or contributory >> infringement (or infringement under any other analogous legal doctrine >> in the applicable jurisdiction). >> >> Sounds all laudable and such, BUT: >> >> There are still some worrisome features of this organization, such as the >> fact that the FSF is NOT part of it, and they are really granting cross >> licensing only to other members. Further, they have built a pretty >> massive escape clause into their License Agreement >> [openinventionnetwork.com] in Section 2. >> >> A careful read of their cross license agreement suggest this could turn >> ugly after enough patents are in the system which also find their way into >> Linux. >> >> The FAQ is here: http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/about_faq.php >> The membership is here: http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/licensees.php >> [openinventionnetwork.com] (just about every Distro you ever heard of is >> represented). > > So I'd say if we consider we should ask the FSF their take on it... > Otherwise skip it. At this point I think it would make us more of a target > than we currently are. :) > > Kent > -- > m...@cs.umn.edu > http://www.cs.umn.edu/~mein > _______________________________________________ > Bf-committers mailing list > Bf-committers@blender.org > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers > _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers