On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 08:55:54PM +0000, Tzeng, Nigel H. wrote: > If the USG is using CC0 for their new OSS initiative > is this something that should be revisited?
Yes, I think so. > Of course, you know I¹m of the opinion that is the OSI states a license is > open source if it passes the OSD then we should either amend the OSD to > require explicit patent grants moving forward or not block useful new > licenses because of the lack of a patent grant. I'm inclined to agree with that. Note, though, the controversial issue with CC0 was the explicit refusal to grant a patent license. I don't think a license with a similar feature has been submitted for OSI approval since the CC0 event. The OSI has approved at least one license since that time that did not explicitly address patents. Richard _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
