Make 2(b) use the definition of Defensive Purpose rather than providing a different definition of "defensively"

[joshtriplett]

This ensures that a company filing a patent suit for a Defensive Purpose does not open themselves to lawsuits by other companies who follow this agreement.

[jrconlin]

In addition, can we have some clarification of what "Defensive" means or in what context it applies?

For instance, say I create a library that uses GPL. I discover that Twitter uses it, but fails to publish the code/include copyright statement/etc. If I sought correction, would that trigger a "Defensive" action of being sued for any patent related content my library (or other libraries I may have authored) may contain?

The above is just one potential non-patent related scenario that could trigger the defense mechanism. I can easily imagine others.

[joshtriplett]

@jrconlin That seems like a separate issue. This pull request will make sure the whole agreement uses the same definition of "Defensive Purpose"; if you want to clarify that definition, I'd suggest filing a separate issue about that.

I do agree that the issue you raised seems significant.

[jrconlin]

Thanks, will do. Also took the opportunity to generalize it a bit:
#15

[joshtriplett]

I like this pull request (even though recursion sometimes makes my head hurt). Unless I can think of some reason over the weekend for not doing this, I think I will merge it...

Any status on this? Any reasons not to merge? (Happy to update if doesn't apply.)

[joshtriplett]

Any plans to incorporate this change?

[CLAassistant]

Thank you for your submission! We really appreciate it. Like many open source projects, we ask that you sign our Contributor License Agreement before we can accept your contribution.
_{You have signed the CLA already but the status is still pending? Let us recheck it.}

[sarasfox]

how do i sign the cla

…

On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 10:10 AM CLAassistant ***@***.***> wrote: [image: CLA assistant check] <https://cla-assistant.io/twitter/innovators-patent-agreement?pullRequest=14> Thank you for your submission, we really appreciate it. Like many open source projects, we ask that you sign our Contributor License Agreement <https://cla-assistant.io/twitter/innovators-patent-agreement?pullRequest=14> before we can accept your contribution. You have signed the CLA already but the status is still pending? Let us recheck <https://cla-assistant.io/check/twitter/innovators-patent-agreement?pullRequest=14> it. — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#14?email_source=notifications&email_token=ABBNP5D6YGCCN34QBPFKPY3QACBUZA5CNFSM4ABBXPIKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOD2IZLOQ#issuecomment-512857530>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABBNP5HFYEQ5NJYKXBXJMH3QACBUZANCNFSM4ABBXPIA> .