RE: [dss] ballot on RAND mode

["Uri Resnitzky" <Uri@arx.com>]

Andreas,

I was very sad to hear your decision.
On one hand you mention new work which you think is useful, and on the other hand you are in fact preventing this TC to continue to do any more work.

Please also remember that the v1.0 DSS core spec (if approved as OASIS standard) will be on the old policy anyway, and that most implementations will depend on it, so the "barb wire" you mention is already in there whether we all like it or not.

Also as mentioned in the call yesterday in new work that we do we can always declare that RF applies to any specific piece. You will always have the chance to withdraw if an important new piece is voted as a CD without such declarations from the members.

And my last point is regarding the term "democratic" that was used yesterday.
Unfortunately this IPR transition process is NOT democratic because of the veto rule.
I believe that if modern democracies had veto rules in their parliaments, nothing would ever be done...
If however we all agree that the democratic spirit should be maintained, then I suggest all those who voted NO for RF limited or plan to vote NO for RAND please withdraw from this TC, then we can have a more democratic ballot, and then whoever wants to can join again.

Just to be clear - my own vote (if and when I am eligible to vote) will be YES for either RAND and RF limited because I believe that continuing the work of this TC is more important than any other consideration.
Please also remember that if this TC breaks up, the chances that DSS 1.0 Core spec will be accepted, promoted and eventually used is much smaller than if we continue to work and improve it.

I would also like to get clarifications from the OASIS staff about the process and time frame it will take to re-create this TC if it breaks up.

Thanks,

- Uri 

-----Original Message-----
From: Andreas Kuehne [mailto:kuehne@klup.de] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 11:55 AM
To: dss@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [dss] ballot on RAND mode

Hi all,

I entered the conf call yesterday with the intent not to hamper the TC if it comes to balloting for RAND. But after hearing all your opinions, talking to my colleagues and doing a long dog walk I came to the conclusion that it's not a good way for DSS to go on under a RAND policy. Many other TC made transitions to RF. So any interested party looking at DSS on RAND will have the immediate 'beware, lawyers ahead !' 
impulse and will shy away from our spec. Paired with an rating of 'that's not hard to re-invent' many potential users may start to tinker something on their own. So the work of this TC may cause the complete opposite effect of what we intended !

I don't want to spoil the party but I don't want to support wrapping the spec with barb wire. I'll vote 'NO' for RAND.

Greetings

Andreas

___________________________________________________
Andreas Kühne
phone: +49 177 293 24 97
mailto: kuehne@trustable.de

Trustable
Kirchröder Str. 70e
30625 Hannover
Germany
www.trustable.de

Kostenlose Verifikation qualifizierter elektronischer Signaturen:
www.sig-check.de