Branden Robinson wrote: > On Sat, Apr 10, 2004 at 03:47:28PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote: >> In general I think the free software community would be best served by >> licenses that strongly discourage patent actions. So I think it is >> desirable for us to interpret the DFSG in a manner that allows for >> such licenses while not violating the text of the DFSG. > > I agree that software patents are extremely insidious and potentially > very threatening to the development and use of Free Software. > > I do not believe that any conceivable defense is necessarily warranted, > however. > > Moreover, I am not at all confident that the OSL 2.0 is a good vehicle > via which to communicate our intolerance of software patents. > > However, I do agree that it's not necessary to fight this battle right > now, as the OSL 2.0 is defective in other, less controversial, respects.
I think it's not controversial that the OSL "software patent" clause is overbroad. Even if software patent retaliation clauses in general are acceptable, termination clauses based on patents "applicable" -- but not actually "applied" -- to software potentially discriminate against all holders of legitimate patents. Everyone seems to agree about this, at least. -- There are none so blind as those who will not see.
