Subject: Re: license with patent grants appropriate for specifications?
From: "todd glassey" <todd.glassey@worldnet.att.net>
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 06:01:10 -0800

Bob Larry - why not build a couple of OS licenses like the different
copyright statements available under the current RFC's.

Todd

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bob Scheifler" <Bob.Scheifler@Sun.COM>
To: <lrosen@rosenlaw.com>
Cc: <license-discuss@opensource.org>; "'Ipr-Wg@Ietf.Org'" <ipr-wg@ietf.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2005 3:46 PM
Subject: Re: license with patent grants appropriate for specifications?


> > The compromise I try to reach with patent owners in the context of
industry
> > standards is that
> > (1) patent owners may choose to limit the scope of their patent license
> > grants to compliant implementations, and
> > (2) those patent licenses may not restrict anyone from creating and
> > distributing non-compliant implementations.
> >
> > As to the specification copyright license, it is consistent with open
source
> > principles if it grants you permission to create derivative works of the
> > specification.
>
> So, is it reasonable to take the following approach:
>   - issue the specification itself under an existing open source license,
>     one that in and of itself does not grant any patent rights with
respect
>     to implementations of the spec
>   - provide separately a patent-only license that grants patent rights
>     to compliant implementations of that specification (or broader if
>     one wishes)
> rather than trying to bundle these together into a single open source
> license? The patent-only license, not being a source license at all,
> presumably does not have to be an open source license.
>
> - Bob
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ipr-wg mailing list
> Ipr-wg@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg