[Discuss] [Open Manufacturing] patent pools for defense of open source contributors

[Michael Weinberg]

+1 one that.  Defensive patent licensing is a great idea, but finding the
patents can be complicated.


On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 2:19 PM, alicia <amgibb at gmail.com> wrote:

> If you *have* patents, then yes, I think these systems are excellent for
> open sourcing your patent. I think the aspect missing is many oshw
> companies do not want to go through the hassle of getting the patent.
>
> Remember hardware is inherently open until closed (with a patent)!
>
> Alicia
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 11:25 AM, Matt Maier <blueback09 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Can we apply this same framework to protect open source hardware? It
>> seems like patents are even more important to the hardware side of open
>> source, since they're technically the only thing that speaks to control of
>> the physical items.
>>
>> http://archive.oreilly.com/pub/post/patent_pools_offer_open_source.html
>>
>> "The two patent pool projects concerned here--open source's shining
>> knights in armor--are the Patent Commons Project
>> <http://www.patent-commons.org/> and the Open Invention Network
>> <http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/>. The basic idea is to use the
>> patent system the way companies and inventors have used it from the start:
>> to cross-license patents and use patents defensively so they aren't sued
>> out of existence"
>>
>> Until now, there was no prize for doing open source; you didn't get back
>> anything in return...Now it's different. Open source your software, and you
>> get protection. Individual developers or small software houses that always
>> had to worry about patent lawsuits can now worry a bit less--but only if
>> they play the open-source game...Managers who always asked "What do we get
>> for open-sourcing besides good will?" now have a concrete answer: there
>> will be a lot of legal muscle at their disposal."
>>
>> "If large legal resources are available to anyone open-sourcing his or
>> her software, it suddenly becomes critical to define open source
>> precisely...Amazingly, I have not been able to find anywhere--on the web
>> sites of the Patent Commons Project and the Open Invention Network or among
>> any of the commentators--a definition of open source."
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Open Manufacturing" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to openmanufacturing+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
>> To post to this group, send email to openmanufacturing at googlegroups.com.
>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Open Manufacturing" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to openmanufacturing+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to openmanufacturing at googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>



-- 
Michael Weinberg, Vice President, PK Thinks
202-861-0020 (o) | @mweinbergPK

Public Knowledge | @publicknowledge | www.publicknowledge.org
1818 N St. NW, Suite 410 | Washington, DC 20036 | CFC # 12259

Promoting a Creative & Connected Future.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.oshwa.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140820/d3d03260/attachment-0001.html>