Subject: Re: Open Source Definition : can it be made explicit about non-copyright issues?
From: "Alexander Terekhov" <TEREKHOV@de.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 19:46:47 +0100

Russell McOrmond wrote:
[...]
> Note: There are all these Halloween documents discussing the OSI
> battle-of-words with Microsoft, but I wonder why there is no similar
> discussion with IBM? 

Well, see

http://www.opensource.org/licenses/cpl.php
http://www.opensource.org/licenses/ibmpl.php

and, perhaps, also

http://europa.eu.int/comm/internal_market/en/indprop/comp/ibm.pdf

"[...] IBM has an open patent licensing policy under which we are 
 prepared to licence our patents on a non-discriminatory world-wide 
 basis. Moreover, IBM licences on a royalty-free basis the patents 
 that are necessarily implemented by the use or sale of our open 
 source contributions, a policy that has been endorsed by the Open 
 Source Initiative."

regards,
alexander.

P.S. europa.eu.int/comm/internal_market/en/indprop/comp/eicta.pdf

--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3