"Why would we continue to file patents on work that is going to be open source? The principle reason is to protect the NuPIC community. For example, outside developers could work on similar concepts without becoming part of the open source community. They could seek patents on their own work, making it proprietary and blocking progress of open source NuPIC developers. By keeping our patent portfolio current, we retain the ability to protect the NuPIC community from these threats. In other words, by holding patents on the work, we are able to protect the whole community from others who might seek to wall off their work through patents. In addition to filing select patents going forward, we also will evaluate other measures that would enhance patent protection for the NuPIC community."
Since this is a long-term project, it's more important that Numenta is able to protect the community it is building from patent trolls, and this is one approach to doing that.
Most open source projects do not need a foundation or company patenting things related to the work and acting as a guardian. Why does NuPIC?
The blog post (which is not a legally binding contract in any way) also has this little gem:
"It should be noted that Numenta/Grok holds patents that do not pertain to the algorithms released in NuPIC. We do not view these patents as covered under the GPL, and we reserve the right to use these patents in the normal course of our business."
Assuming this were a legally binding document--which it's not--who would decide which of Numenta's patents are assigned by the GPLv3 and which are not?
I'm happy you are trying to open-source such a cool piece of tech. But this is the patent policy of a company hedging its bets, not a company that's giving something to the world. It leaves Numenta legally in charge of the NuPIC community, instead of letting it evolve, because it's the only entity that can write a GPLv3 on future patents.
At least I can download and play with the GPLv3 version. The old license was so onerous that I didn't want to see the code, lest I open myself to patent liability 10 years down the line for using something kinda sorta like NuPIC.
But I wouldn't build a business on software with this kind of patent policy, and the commercial licenses Numenta sells make me think you'd rather I didn't.
> who would decide which of Numenta's patents are assigned by the GPLv3 and which are not?
The GPL text is rather precise in how to determine which patents are effected. Any patents that would be infringed by some manner of using, making, (...), or modify that specific version of the program is covered by the license.
As far as patent grants goes, it is hard to make something cover beyond that. I guess a license could say "you may not own any patents, and that is the final word", but I do not know any licenses that does that.
Since this is a long-term project, it's more important that Numenta is able to protect the community it is building from patent trolls, and this is one approach to doing that.