patent-left

[Graham Seaman <graham@collector.hscs.wmin.ac.uk>]

I got this back from the sender of that patent-left license:

Forwarded message:
> > Graham wrote:
> > I've forwarded the draft with your request for comments and will summarize
> > them for you if I receive any. However, I'm slightly confused by it,
> > perhaps you could clarify something for me? You sent it in the context of
> > a discussion about gpl-like licenses for hardware
> > designs, but the contents seems to refer entirely to software patents
> > (there are references to 'source code', 'executable', etc but none
> > to 'schematic', for example).
> > Is this the intention, or is this just a sign of its' 'early draft'
> > nature?
 
> It was designed specifically for use with some software that we have developed
> for Berkman use which is why it bears our title. It was not offered as a
> solution for hardware but only as the closest thing we have to any sort of
> patent-commons agreement here at Berkman.  You had asked Lessig if there were
> any legal assistance available for your query; the student who prepared this
> document is the only one that I know working on patent licensing issues.
 
[I've also suggested they contact Bruce Perens re the acceptability of
using software patents in open-source licenses ;-), and mentioning that their
'no sale' condition conflicts with the Open Source Definition, as Erik
said. ]

Graham