[Bf-committers] Open Invention Network
blend.factory at gmail.com
Fri Oct 28 06:30:20 CEST 2011
I'm sure that everyone has done this already but no one posted that
here - If you google for OIN, you can find interesting things:
In that article you can find this link:
On 27 October 2011 17:04, Kent Mein <mein at cs.umn.edu> wrote:
> In reply to Ton Roosendaal (ton at blender.org):
>> From: Ton Roosendaal <ton at blender.org>
>> To: bf-blender developers <bf-committers at blender.org>
>> Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 11:13:28 +0200
>> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936)
>> Subject: [Bf-committers] Open Invention Network
>> Reply-To: bf-blender developers <bf-committers at blender.org>
>> Hi all,
>> I've been contacted by this organization:
>> With the request if Blender Foundation would join as a (free, no
>> costs) member. It's mainly meant as public endorsement from us for them.
>> I don't have much time time to investigate their position in free/open
>> matters. Advice or crits therefore is welcome :)
> Reading through their website kind of gave me the impression why would we
> want to join this? Seems like something we don't want to get into.
> Looking at the comments about it on slashdot
> I Really like the summary from this person, it's mid topic so it's a little
> confusing but read on... :)
>> Re:Trust them as far as you can throw them (Score:5, Informative)
>> by icebike (68054) on Wednesday April 20 2011, @02:09PM (#35883508)
>> > And how do we know that they're not simply joining up to see what others
>> > have there, to make it easier for them to win IP lawsuits?
>> Most patent portfolios come with irrevocable commitments to allow any
>> patent they submit to the portfolio to be used freely forever.
>> This one apparently DOES NOT have such a commitment.
>> From their Agreement:
>> 1.1 Subject to Section 1.2(b), OIN, grants to You and Your Subsidiaries a
>> royalty-free, worldwide, nonexclusive, non-transferable license under OIN
>> Patents to make, have made, use, import, and Distribute any products or
>> services. In addition to the foregoing and without limitation thereof,
>> with respect only to the Linux System, the license granted herein
>> includes the right to engage in activities that in the absence of this
>> Agreement would constitute inducement to infringe or contributory
>> infringement (or infringement under any other analogous legal doctrine
>> in the applicable jurisdiction).
>> Sounds all laudable and such, BUT:
>> There are still some worrisome features of this organization, such as the
>> fact that the FSF is NOT part of it, and they are really granting cross
>> licensing only to other members. Further, they have built a pretty
>> massive escape clause into their License Agreement
>> [openinventionnetwork.com] in Section 2.
>> A careful read of their cross license agreement suggest this could turn
>> ugly after enough patents are in the system which also find their way into
>> The FAQ is here: http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/about_faq.php
>> The membership is here: http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/licensees.php
>> [openinventionnetwork.com] (just about every Distro you ever heard of is
> So I'd say if we consider we should ask the FSF their take on it...
> Otherwise skip it. At this point I think it would make us more of a target
> than we currently are. :)
> mein at cs.umn.edu
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers at blender.org
More information about the Bf-committers