SSPL vs AGPL / Free Software / OSD / DFSG on what must be included

I agree with you that the "owning classes" as you call them are covetous and rent-seeking, but I think mixing copyright and patents is a stupid thing to do.

They're also fundamentally different in that program copyrights (outside of the US) have *always* been treated as a "written work", and it makes sense that way. They are, basically, a mathematical treatise. And written works are not patentable. Nor are mathematical proofs. And programs are also just a (not necessarily correct :-) mathematical proof. So software patents are completely different in that they are figments of miserly lawyers' imagination, not something that actually exists.

So my patent licence would simply be "By distributing this work you accept that it is not patentable material, and you therefore agree not to sue anyone using it for breach of patent. This does not bind your defence in any way shape or form if you are sued on patent grounds for using this work". But that would be *separate* from the copyright licence.

Just as trademark law is a completely separate, third branch of IP, and the GPL explicitly says nothing about it other than explicitly saying you are allowed to exercise it over GPL'd works (and you should be - trying to ban it would be a very stupid thing to do...)

Cheers,
Wol