ESP Wiki is looking for moderators and active contributors!

Implicit patent licence

Revision as of 17:01, 11 December 2014 by Ciaran (talk | contribs) (Dan explains that, in the USA, recipients of software under the GNU GPL version 2 receive an implied patent grant, based on the following US case law:)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Dan Ravicher's explanation

Dan explains that, in the USA, recipients of software under the GNU GPL version 2 receive an implied patent grant, based on the following US case law:

  • [De Forest Radio, 273 U.S. 236 (1927)]

No formal granting of a license is necessar y in order to give it effect. Any language used by the owner of the patent, or any conduct on his part exhibited to another from which that other may properly infer that the owner consents to his use of the patent in making or using it, or selling it, upon which the o ther acts, constitutes a license.” [De Forest Radio, 273 U.S. 236 (1927)

  • Hewlett - Packard Co. v . Repeat - O-Type Stencil Mfg. Corp. , Inc., 123 F. 3d 1445 (Fed. Cir. 1997).

Generally, when a seller sells a product without restriction, it in effect promises the purchaser that in exchange for the price paid, it will not interfere wit h the purchaser's full enjoyment of the product purchased. The buyer has an implied license under any patents of the seller that dominate the product or any uses of the product to which the parties might reasonably contemplate the product will be put.

  • Bottom Line Mgmt., Inc. v. Pan Man, Inc., 228 F. 3d 1352 (Fed. Cir. 2000)

Unless the parties provide otherwise, the purchaser of a patented article has an implied license not only to use and sell it, but also to repair it to enable it to function properly. This implied license covers both the original purchaser of the article and all subsequent purchasers.

External links