[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 mailing list