On-Demand   On-Demand Web Programs

Open Source Software 2018 -- from Compliance to Cooperation

Released on: Dec. 5, 2018
Running Time: 06:43:05

This program will explore the unique legal issues facing the open source and free software community? Our experienced faculty will discuss the challenges developers are facing; the variety of licensing options when developing and using OSS; compliance with both the law and the terms of those licenses; and recent developments in the open source community that are changing how open source and free software is being used around the world.

Lecture Topics [Total time 06:43:05]

Segments with an asterisk (*) are available only with the purchase of the entire program.

  • Opening Remarks* [00:08:03]
    Heather J. Meeker, Mark F. Radcliffe
  • Basics of Open Source Licensing and Best Practices for Open Source License Compliance [01:35:47]
    Van E. Lindberg, Nissa Strottman, Kevin (Xi Zhao) Wang
  • Patents and Open Source [00:59:35]
    Alma Chao, David Marr, Maxwell Sills
  • OSS in Transactions, Licensing and M&A [01:00:25]
    Heather J. Meeker, Mark F. Radcliffe
  • Elimination of Bias in Open Source Communities  [00:59:05]
    Heather J. Meeker, Luis Villa
  • Trademarks in Open Source [01:00:40]
    Pamela Chestek, Shane Curcuru
  • Hot Topics: APIs and Open Source [00:59:30]
    Heather J. Meeker, Luis Villa, Shane Curcuru

The purchase price of this Web Program includes the following articles from the Course Handbook available online:

  • COMPLETE COURSE HANDBOOK
  • Basics of Open Source Licensing (Outline) (November 2018)
    Kevin Wang, Van E. Lindberg, Nissa M. Strottman
  • Basics of Open Source Licensing (November 2018) (PowerPoint slides)
    Nissa M. Strottman
  • Quick Reference Materials for Panel Discussion on Patents and Open Source (Substantive Outline) (November 2018)
    David Marr
  • Common Open Source Licenses
    Heather J. Meeker
  • Transactions, Licensing and M&A (Substantive Outline) (November 2018)
    Mark F. Radcliffe
  • Outline of Issues and Resources for Recognition and Elimination of Bias in FOSS Communities (Substantive Outline) (November 2018)
    Heather J. Meeker, Luis Villa, Katie Gosewehr
  • Open Source Clients and Their Trademarks: Different Motivations & Different Needs (Substantive Outline) (November 28, 2018)
    Shane Curcuru
  • FOSSmarks: A Practical Guide to Understanding Trademarks in the Context of Free and Open Source Software Projects
    Pamela S. Chestek
  • Who Owns the Project Name?
    Pamela S. Chestek
  • Model Trademark Guidelines
    Pamela S. Chestek
  • The Commons Clause (November 2018), https://commonsclause.com/
    Heather J. Meeker
  • Revisiting the Open Source Business Model (June 24, 2018), https://heathermeeker.com/2018/06/24/revisiting-the-open-source-business-model/
    Heather J. Meeker
  • Blog about Commons Clause (September 7, 2018), https://techcrunch.com/2018/09/07/commonsclause-stops-open-source-abuse/
    Heather J. Meeker
  • The Commons Clause Will Destroy Open Source (August 22, 2018), https://drewdevault.com/2018/08/22/commons-clause-will-destroy-opensource.html
    Heather J. Meeker
  • Open Source Project Closes as a Political Protest on Immigration, Then Re-Opens (August 30, 2018), https://heathermeeker.com/2018/08/30/open-source-project-closes-as-a-political-protest-onimmigration-then-re-opens/
    Heather J. Meeker

Presentation Material

  • Basics of Open Source Licensing and Best Practices for Open Source License Compliance
    Van E. Lindberg, Nissa Strottman, Kevin (Xi Zhao) Wang
  • Basics of Open Source Licensing and Best Practices for Open Source License Compliance
    Van E. Lindberg, Nissa Strottman, Kevin (Xi Zhao) Wang
  • Basics of Open Source Licensing and Best Practices for Open Source License Compliance
    Van E. Lindberg, Nissa Strottman, Kevin (Xi Zhao) Wang
  • Patents and Open Source
    Alma Chao, David Marr, Maxwell Sills
  • OSS in Transactions, Licensing and M&A
    Heather J. Meeker, Mark F. Radcliffe
  • OSS in Transactions, Licensing and M&A
    Heather J. Meeker, Mark F. Radcliffe
  • Elimination of Bias in Open Source Communities 
    Heather J. Meeker, Luis Villa
  • Trademarks in Open Source
    Pamela Chestek, Shane Curcuru
  • Hot Topics: APIs and Open Source
    Heather J. Meeker, Mark F. Radcliffe, Luis Villa
Co-Chair(s)
Heather J. Meeker ~ O'Melveny & Myers LLP
Mark F. Radcliffe ~ Co-Chair, Technology and Sourcing Practice Group, DLA Piper LLP (US)
Speaker(s)
Alma Chao ~ Facebook Legal
Pamela Chestek ~ Chestek Legal
Shane Curcuru ~ The Apache Software Foundation
Van E. Lindberg ~ Dykema Gossett PLLC
Dave Marr ~ Vice President, Legal Counsel, Qualcomm Technologies Inc
Maxwell Sills ~ Google Inc
Luis Villa ~ Co-founder and General Counsel, Tidelift
General credit information about this format appears below. For credit information specific to this program, please choose your jurisdiction(s) in the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page.

PLI’s live and on-demand webcasts are single-user license products intended for an individual registrant only. Credit will be issued only to the individual registered.


U.S. MCLE States

Alabama:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

Alaska:  All PLI products can fulfill Alaska’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Arizona:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “interactive CLE” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via interactive CLE programs.

Arkansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for Arkansas CLE credit.

California:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “participatory” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via participatory programs.

Colorado:  All PLI products can fulfill Colorado’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Connecticut: Effective January 1, 2017, all PLI products can fulfill Connecticut’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Delaware:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “eCLE” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of eCLE per reporting period, no more than 6 of which may be audio-only.

Florida:  All PLI products can fulfill Florida’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Georgia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “in-house” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 in-house credits per reporting period.

Hawaii:  All PLI products can fulfill Hawaii’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Idaho:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Illinois:  All PLI products can fulfill Illinois' CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Indiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance education” credit. Attorneys are limited to 9 credits of distance education per reporting period. Effective January 1, 2019, the limit of distance education per reporting period will increase from 9 to 18 credits.

Iowa:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “unmoderated” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of unmoderated programs per reporting period.

Kansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “prerecorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of prerecorded programs per reporting period.

Kentucky:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “non-live” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 non-live credits per reporting period.

Louisiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Maine:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5.5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Minnesota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 on-demand credits per reporting period.

Mississippi:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Missouri:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Montana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Nebraska:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “computer-based learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of computer-based learning per reporting period.

Nevada:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via self-study programs.

New Hampshire:  All PLI products can fulfill New Hampshire’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

New Jersey:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternative verifiable learning formats” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of alternative verifiable learning formats per reporting period.

New Mexico:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

New York

Experienced Attorneys:  All PLI products can fulfill New York’s CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Newly Admitted Attorneys:  PLI’s transitional on-demand web programs can be used to fulfill the requirements for New York newly admitted attorneys. Only professional practice and law practice management credits may be earned via transitional on-demand web programs. Ethics and skills credits may not be earned via on-demand web programs.

North Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

North Dakota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Ohio:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Oklahoma:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online, on-demand programs per reporting period.

Oregon:  All PLI products can fulfill Oregon’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Pennsylvania:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Puerto Rico:  All PLI products can fulfill Puerto Rico’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Rhode Island:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “video replay” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 video replay credits per reporting period.

South Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternatively delivered” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of alternatively delivered programs per reporting period.

Tennessee:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Texas:  All PLI products can fulfill Texas’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Utah:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Vermont:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 10 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Virgin Islands:  All PLI products can fulfill the Virgin Islands’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “pre-recorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of pre-recorded programs per reporting period.

Washington:  All PLI products can fulfill Washington’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

West Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of online instruction per reporting period.

Wisconsin:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “repeated, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of repeated, on-demand programs per reporting period. No ethics credits can be earned via on-demand web programs.

Wyoming:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.


CPD Jurisdictions

British Columbia (CPD-BC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not eligible for CPD-BC credit unless viewed with at least one other attorney or an articled student. In this case, the credit must be recorded as a “study group.”

Ontario (CPD-ON):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “recorded” credit. If viewed without a colleague, attorneys are limited to 6 credits of recorded programs per year. If viewed with at least one colleague, there is no limit to the number of credits that can be earned via recorded programs.

Quebec (CPD-QC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill Quebec’s CPD requirements.

Hong Kong (CPD-HK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CPD-HK credit.

United Kingdom (CPD-UK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill the United Kingdom’s CPD requirements.

Australia (CPD-AUS):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Australia’s CPD requirements. Credit limits for on-demand web programs vary according to jurisdiction. Please refer to your jurisdiction’s CPD information page for specifics.

Alberta (CPD-ALBERTA):  All PLI products can fulfill Alberta’s CPD requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Dubai (CLPD-DUBAI):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill CLPD credit requirements.


Other Credit Types

CPE Credit (NASBA):  Select on-demand web programs qualify as the “QAS Self-Study” delivery method. Please check the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page to verify CPE credit availability.

IRS Continuing Education (IRS-CE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill IRS-CE requirements. To request IRS-CE credit, please notify PLI at plicredits@pli.edu of your request and include your Preparer Tax Identification Number (PTIN).

Certified Fraud Examiner CPE:  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Certified Fraud Examiner CPE requirements. To request CPE credit or find out which programs offer CPE, please contact PLI at plicredits@pli.edu.

IAPP Continuing Privacy Credit (CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Privacy CPE credit requirements.

HR Recertification (HRCI):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill HR credit requirements.

SHRM Recertification (SHRM):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as "self-paced" credit. SHRM professionals are limited to 30 credits of self-paced programs per recertification period.

Compliance Certification Board (CCB):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Candidates are limited to 10 self-study credits per 12-month period, and certification holders are limited to 20 self-study credits per 2-year renewal period.

Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialists Certification (CAMS):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CAMS credit.

New York State Social Worker Continuing Education (SW CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for SW CPE credit.

American Bankers Association Professional Certification (ABA):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill ABA credit requirements.

Certified Financial Planners (CFP):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CFP credit.

 

Related Items

Live Programs  Live Programs

Open Source Software 2019 - from Compliance to Cooperation (San Francisco, CA) Oct. 1, 2019

Handbook  Course Handbook Archive

Open Source Software 2018—From Compliance to Cooperation Mark F. Radcliffe, DLA Piper LLP (US)
Heather J. Meeker, O'Melveny & Myers LLP
 
Share
Email

  • FOLLOW PLI:
  • twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube
  • RSS

All Contents Copyright © 1996-2019 Practising Law Institute. Continuing Legal Education since 1933.

© 2019 PLI PRACTISING LAW INSTITUTE. All rights reserved. The PLI logo is a service mark of PLI.