<<Right. It's poorly written and someone needs to be clopped upside the>>
head with a big foam cluebat. Individually, there is no way those
things could be enforceable declared PI.
And that's the problem I have. If one believes that some elements of PI were intended to be protected, but can't be protected, then the reformation clause could be triggered:
14 Reformation: If any provision of this License is held to be unenforceable, such provision shall be reformed only to the extent necessary to make it enforceable.
There are two types of reformation regarding unprotectable elements of PI: trim them from the list of protected elements so that only things that could be protected are left OR reform the ownership requirement so that all PI elements can be protected via a definition of "PI ownership" that extends beyond trademark and copyright law.
The fact that those two are so extremely different outcomes make me nervous about what is and is not able to be protected as PI.
The "ownership" requirement for PI declarations does not provide a definition of ownership, but it provides a laundry list of PI elements, many of which can't be traditionally "owned" under trademark or copyright law.
Lee
