2 ms·
While I don't care about attribution, the disruption of provenance is problematic. Heard that loudly and clearly several time in this thread. Suppose that Foo
by kiba 15y ago
While I don't care about attribution, the disruption of provenance is problematic.
Heard that loudly and clearly several time in this thread.
Suppose that Foo Corp releases Unlicensed code that includes patented material. Baz Ltd goes on to develop a widget that uses Foo's code. Later on, Bar Inc buys Foo Corp and files suit against Baz.
Good point. The problem only exists because patent exists.
- clarkevans 15y agoThe point is that copyright dedications are not licenses. Therefore, if you want to submarine someone... do a copyright dedication (but don't grant patent rights). Wait till your "public domain" work is broadly adopted, then sue. Or, conversely, if you want to get sued... use works in the public domain where the person doing the dedication hasn't also granted patent license. At least if you use a standard MIT license there may be an "equitable estoppel through acquiescence" in which the copyright holder might not be able to sue you for patent infringement since the MIT license said you could use the work.
- icebraining 15y agoIt's better to use the Apache 2.0 license which includes a patent grant, though.