> On Oct 25, 2023, at 9:43 PM, Seth David Schoen <sch...@loyalty.org> wrote: > > Of course, license instruments that implement this strategy are not > themselves open source licenses. But we thought it was likely that > subscribers of this list would be familiar with examples of this > practice and might be able to suggest some that we haven't identified > yet.
Not an example of a license per-se but a tangentially related practice in the U.S. Federal Government space is how Small Business Innovative Research (“SBIRs”) contracts/grants are defined in federal regulation see DFARS 227.7104 and DFARS 252.227-7018 clauses. Basically, a company agreeing to receive a SBIR is given 5 years to essentially do what they want with the work and data they develop, try to market it, built the small business etc. After the end of that 5-year period, Government’s rights change from Gov’t purpose rights (GPR — where they can only use the code in-house) to unlimited rights. Consequently that means the SBIR awardee can open-source the work during the 5 year prior, and the Gov’t can after 5 years. Note in practice the clock only stops ticking after the last related contract mod, even if the wprl o SBI Of course, not a given as contracts can override defaults to specify something else, or new regulation might apply like the new 2022 rule that applies retroactively to 2019 making some SBIRs (phase 3 projects?) have a 20 year data rights period instead of 5. Cheers! Sean _______________________________________________ The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Official statements by the Open Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address. License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@lists.opensource.org http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
