We apply for and are granted patents on a regular basis at ARL. In fact, part of how scientists and engineers are evaluated on their performance can include the number of patents they get, all of which are owned by the USG.
Thanks, Cem Karan > -----Original Message----- > From: License-discuss [mailto:license-discuss-boun...@opensource.org] On > Behalf Of Brian Behlendorf > Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2016 8:46 PM > To: ch...@dibona.com; 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. > > > > > ---- > > > Totally agree. But can the USG file patents? I suppose research > organizations can (MITRE, maybe even NASA?) so it's not that academic; > but presumably any place where this public domain arises, it applies to > patents too. Would be nice to get that sorted. > > Brian > > On Thu, 18 Aug 2016, Chris DiBona wrote: > > 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> wrote: > > On 8/18/16, 3:57 PM, "License-discuss on behalf of Lawrence Rosen" > > <license-discuss-boun...@opensource.org on behalf of > > 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-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
