 these components [8]. The question of Intellectual Property (IP) is an important one in open source. Whether open source software is patented and subsequently released under a proprietary or open source license hinges upon whether the author or originator believes there is more value to be created in licens- ing, or from the generative effects of exposure. Once the decision to contribute software into open source is made, it is important to establish which open source license to distribute the software under. In the open source world, in addition to releasing the source code, all open source licenses grant copyright rights to the software being distributed by the originator. Each open source license balances different concerns and attempts to foster a development community that meets the licen- sor's needs. Certain open source licensing regimes put conditions on downstream users for software "freedom" rights resulting in "copyleft" licenses. For example, strong copyleft licenses prioritize ensuring that all downstream users receive an unrestricted right to the source code and permis- sion to modify the software. By contrast, the permissive licenses guarantee the availability of the license rights only for the first downstream generation; and these licenses are generally understood to permit downstream users to release modified versions under more restrictive terms (including both proprietary and copyleft terms). Some licenses explicitly grant patent rights to avoid patent disputes among users. Generally, there are four open source licensing regimes: Academic Licenses: These are the simplest licensing regimes where the demands on down- stream users of the open source software are minimal, mostly requiring attribution to the originator and the retention of copyright notices (e.g., MIT and BSD licenses). Permissive Licenses: Next in complexity, these licenses provide downstream users sub- stantial rights including, in some cases, explicit patent rights while allowing all down- stream uses, including adding the open