Walter Vermeir wrote: You seem to be forgetting that the Wikimedia Foundation does not own IP rights to MediaWiki, except for perhaps the Yahoo XML feed. Some of it was placed in the public domain by Lee Daniel Crocker, the rest is owned by the developers who contributed it. Whether or not our code is patented is our decision. Personally I'm not fond of the idea of calling code "open source" but requiring that people get permission if they want to use it. Even if Magnus Manske (or whoever it was) wanted to patent the language code thing, it couldn't be patented anyway, because it is not new. From http://www.bitlaw.com/patent/requirements.html : Novelty (Newness) Requirement: In order for an invention to be patentable, it must be new as defined in the patent law. This novelty requirement states that an invention cannot be patented if certain public disclosures of the invention have been made. The statute which explains when a public disclosure has been made (35 U.S.C. Section 102) is complicated and often requires a detailed analysis of the facts and the law. The most important rule, however, is that an invention will not normally be patentable if: * the invention was known to the public before it was "invented" by the individual seeking patent protection; * the invention was described in a publication more than one year prior to the filing date; or * the invention was used publicly, or offered for sale to the public more than one year prior to the filing date. Although the United States grants the one year grace period described in the last two rules above, most other countries do not grant such a period. Therefore, it is almost always preferable to file a patent application before any public disclosure of the invention. Most patent attorneys will try diligently to file a patent application prior to any public release or announcement in order to allow international patent filings. [end quote] -- Tim Starling