On 02/18/2012 08:09 PM, Karl Fogel wrote: > So my feeling is, to reject CC0 because of clause 4a, we have to be > *sure* that clause 4a actually >> * Increases a recipient's risk of being an infringement claim target, > --> and/or --> > * Weakens a recipient's defense against an infringement claim. More likely we reject CC0 because a dedication to the public domain weakens a recipient's defense from patent infringement when compared to the form of acquiescence in a use license. There is a set of licenses that comply with the requirements of the OSD but would be a bad idea for anyone to use. OSI has mostly avoided certifying such licenses. Thanks Bruce -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20120218/11c65b52/attachment.html> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: bruce.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 266 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20120218/11c65b52/attachment.vcf> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4447 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20120218/11c65b52/attachment.p7s>