|Promote the development and use of Open Source software
||Every patent submitted under this license will become available,
royalty-free, in any Open Source work.
|Prevent patents from hindering non-Open Source software
||If the software contains patents exclusively from one or more
specific Open Patent Pools, then the software can be written and
distributed royalty-free, by companies who have agreed to the
terms of that pool.
|Encourage anti-monopolistic behavior
||Patents and Copyrights are monopolies granted by governments.
The creation and protection of intellectual properties is monopolistic
to begin with. Under the OPL, the more openly you license your intellectual
property for the world to use, the more intellectual property becomes
available for you to use. The more you abandon the notion of monopolizing
your intellectual property, the more you benefit. Anti-monopolistic behavior
is encouraged and rewarded.
|Provide a cost-effective choice that enhances
product development and speeds deployment
Even when cooperation among participants through free cross-licensing
of patents initially ends up costing about the same as the costs of
royalty negotiations, the decision to make use of this license will provide
the participants with the ability to make use of a far larger set of patents
than would ever have been seriously considered in the original negotiation.
Access to a far larger set of patents means that future product
development will not be nearly as restricted as would be the case
if further negotiations were required before product changes could be
Avoidable intellectual property restrictions won't limit creativity
in product design, legal costs lower, and time-to-market shortens.
|Provide patent owners with a safe method to
freely share their inventions.
The patent system generally discourages free licensing of inventions.
Even if the patent owner would rather not limit the ability of the
public to use the patented ideas, traditional, free licensing of
the patent could often be to the owners detriment, making such licensing
a rare and unlikely occurance. It is especially unlikely that a corporate
patent owner would act against itself in this way, even if the heads
of the corporation believe that such a restriction of the use of ideas
and general knowledge is unethical. This dilema is an especially troublesome
issue in the area of software patents, which are widely believed to be
detrimental to progress, and which greatly restrict individual writers.
This license is designed to enable patent owners to freely share
their inventions, and benefit by doing so, thus providing patent
owners with a new option for a previously difficult ethical decision.
|Help reverse the current tendency to restrict the
results and processes of basic scientific research.
||The results of basic scientific research done at colleges and universities
are increasingly available to the public only through restrictive licensing.
Even if these restrictions are intended to affect only commercial
implementations of the new inventions and discoveries, the notion
of imposing restrictions on knowledge and ideas as a method
of funding basic research is at odds with fundamental principles
of scientific inquiry.
Although not a complete solution to the problem by any means, this license
will at least allow colleges and universities to license their intellectual
property to other organizations as openly as other organizations license
theirs. It's not a complete solution, but it is at least a definite