Re: [License-discuss] Views on React licensing?

2016-12-12 Thread Rick Moen
Quoting Henrik Ingo (henrik.i...@avoinelama.fi): > Good to remember that CC0 is not an OSI approved open source license, > precisely because it did not grant a patent license. As someone who was part of that conversation, I feel the above doesn't accurately summarise its substance: We were in

Re: [License-discuss] Views on React licensing?

2016-12-12 Thread Lawrence Rosen
John Cowan wrote: > I know that it's not typical for a patent holder to sue Bobs who merely use a > patented article that they obtain from a non-licensed manufacturer, but > that's a matter of it being economically inefficient to sue a huge list of > known and unknown customers, not a

Re: [License-discuss] Views on React licensing?

2016-12-12 Thread John Cowan
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 4:16 PM, Lawrence Rosen wrote: If Yoyodyne or Soylent sue MIT because they had previous exclusive patent > licenses or contracts, that is court fun for them. It doesn't involve me. > Agreed. I only mentioned this hypo to defend my claim that if MIT

Re: [License-discuss] Views on React licensing?

2016-12-12 Thread Lawrence Rosen
John, my responses below. This is not legal advice! :-) /Larry From: John Cowan [mailto:co...@ccil.org] Sent: Monday, December 12, 2016 12:58 PM To: lro...@rosenlaw.com; license-discuss@opensource.org Subject: Re: [License-discuss] Views on React licensing? On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at

Re: [License-discuss] Views on React licensing?

2016-12-12 Thread John Cowan
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Lawrence Rosen wrote: Competence wasn't the real issue. The legal and technical effort required > by any large organization to avoid incompatible patent license grants can > be huge. Instead they said simply: "Here is this copyrighted work.

Re: [License-discuss] Views on React licensing?

2016-12-12 Thread Henrik Ingo
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 7:55 PM, Lawrence Rosen wrote: > Henrik Ingo wrote: > > MIT is on record as saying that the MIT license, which is otherwise > equivalent to the 2-clause BSD license, does *not* grant a patent license. I just wanted to catch this email client

Re: [License-discuss] Views on React licensing?

2016-12-12 Thread Lawrence Rosen
John Cowan wrote: > what, is MIT so incompetent they haven't kept track of what patent licenses > they have issued? Apprarently so. Competence wasn't the real issue. The legal and technical effort required by any large organization to avoid incompatible patent license grants can be huge.

Re: [License-discuss] Views on React licensing?

2016-12-12 Thread John Cowan
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 12:19 PM, Simon Phipps wrote: Do you have a citation to support that please? A quick web search did not > identify one, but obviously it's a big web out there. > I don't, but it was on one of the OSI mailing lists during the discussion of the Brode

Re: [License-discuss] Views on React licensing?

2016-12-12 Thread Lawrence Rosen
Henrik Ingo wrote: MIT is on record as saying that the MIT license, which is otherwise equivalent to the 2-clause BSD license, does *not* grant a patent license. I also would like to see a reference to that written statement. But I believe it to be true only if it means: . . . does

Re: [License-discuss] Views on React licensing?

2016-12-12 Thread Alex Rousskov
On 12/12/2016 10:05 AM, John Cowan wrote: > On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 5:44 AM, Henrik Ingo wrote: >> Many people, including significant producers of BSD software, believe >> that the BSD license is also a patent license. > MIT is on record as saying that the MIT license, which is otherwise >

Re: [License-discuss] Views on React licensing?

2016-12-12 Thread Brian Behlendorf
On Mon, 12 Dec 2016, John Cowan wrote: On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 5:44 AM, Henrik Ingo wrote: Many people, including significant producers of BSD software, believe that the BSD license is also a patent license. MIT is on record as saying that the MIT

Re: [License-discuss] Views on React licensing?

2016-12-12 Thread John Cowan
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 5:44 AM, Henrik Ingo wrote: Many people, including significant producers of BSD software, believe > that the BSD license is also a patent license. > MIT is on record as saying that the MIT license, which is otherwise equivalent to the 2-clause

Re: [License-discuss] Views on React licensing?

2016-12-12 Thread Henrik Ingo
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 11:00 PM, Tzeng, Nigel H. wrote: > On 12/6/16, 3:33 PM, "henrik.i...@gmail.com on behalf of Henrik Ingo" > wrote: >>The question isn't about patents or copyrights. The point is that