[time-nuts] TAPR Open HArdware License -- Public Comment Period
John Ackermann N8UR
jra at febo.com
Mon Feb 12 14:05:18 EST 2007
Magnus Danielson wrote:
> Neither does the BSD license attempt to indicate that it deals with patents,
> which actually makes things easier since then it assumes the normal laws are
> in action. This still leaves questions about the content of the design which is
> covered. I really wonder if the OHL patent immunity clauses really fly. I would
> not trust them to. I will have to check the details, but I don't think that it
> can be written out. Working it the opposite, it should then make it clear that
> when sharing a design this way, it manifests itself as an open publication and
> thus any techniques disclosed is to be considered as public and thus can not be
> patented by a third party or the original contributor afterhand.
(We should probably avoid boring the non-IP-interested time-nuts to
death by moving this off list, or to the technocrat.net/OHL discussion
The patent immunity may or may not hold up -- but you can say that about
almost any legal provision! However, when you grant an immunity -- a
promise not to exercise whatever rights you might have -- that has value
even if you don't actually own a patent; providing the other party with
peace of mind that they won't be sued is a benefit in and of itself.
That's the hook that the OHL hangs its hat on.
Publication only has a blocking effect if you haven't already filed a
patent application (and in the US, you actually have one year after
publication to file). So the two concepts aren't mutually exclusive.
More information about the time-nuts