Re: [ebxml-cppa] IP statement from IBM

[James Bryce Clark <jamie.clark@mmiec.com>]

I will be about 10-15 minutes late to the conference.  My apologies.  I 
have quickly read Karl's conveyance of IBM's new statement below and 
believe it meets our minimum needs, for reasons I will be happy to explain 
on the call.  That doesn't mean I am happy with the whole course of IBM's 
disclosure, but it does mean it appears to have come within workable 
bounds.  Based on my understanding of it, which certainly is very cursory 
and will need to be confirmed by more careful reading today, my own 
conclusion is that I plan to vote in favor of both specification votes, 
later this afternoon.   regards  Jamie Clark



t 07:29 AM 5/31/02, Karl F. Best wrote:
>CPPA TC:
>
>I received yesterday afternoon the attached statement from IBM regarding
>their IP claims to the work of the TC. In my opinion this addresses most
>of the concerns and questions raised since the release of their
>licensing policy a few weeks ago. I hope that this will resolve issues
>that some of you may have that might prevent you from voting in favour
>of the specification.
>
>Patrick Gannon, the OASIS CEO, asked me to pass on the following
>statement:
>
>"The following statement form IBM dated May 30, 2002, clarifies many of
>the concerns that have been raised by members of the CPPA TC and other
>organizations planning to implement the CPPA specification.  IBM has
>clarified two major issues related to (1) the reciprocity of licensing
>any patent claims from other parties, and (2) granting their
>royalty-free license to the currently published v1 & v2 specs with a
>commitment to extend the royalty-free license to future versions of the
>specs should such future version of the CPPA specs be delivered.
>
>This statement, taken together with the previous statements from IBM and
>their license agreement, means that the OASIS ebXML CPPA Committee
>Specification along with all other ebXML specifications remains
>ROYALTY-FREE.  If the OASIS CPPA TC members believe that the CPPA
>specification is ready to be submitted to the OASIS Standard process,
>then I recommend that the TC members vote in favor of recommending this
>specification be adopted as an OASIS Committee Specification.  It is
>through the OASIS open process and our cooperation with the UN/CEFACT
>and their representatives from governments and associations around the
>world that we will achieve consensus and market-force will to keep the
>family of ebXML specifications available for royalty-free
>implementation."
>
>
>The IBM statement is below.
>
></karl>
>=================================================================
>Karl F. Best
>OASIS - Director, Technical Operations
>+1 978.667.5115 x206
>karl.best@oasis-open.org  http://www.oasis-open.org
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------
>To ebXML "Collaboration Protocol Profile and Agreement" interested
>parties:
>
>Recently,  questions have arisen, indicating potential misunderstandings
>about  IBM's recent patent disclosure and license offer.  The following
>responses are offered to address these questions.
>
>Q)  Why is IBM disclosing patents and offering a license?
>
>A) The ebXML effort operates under the OASIS intellectual property
>rules. According to these rules, IBM provided the CPPA related patent
>disclosures and the supporting licensing information. It was an IBM
>business decision to provide this license with royalty-free terms.
>
>Q)  Is the IBM license "free for all time"?
>
>A)   YES.  Patents are granted and remain enforceable until they are
>either abandoned or until  20 years from the original application date.
>The license granted by IBM, for the CPPA specifications,  is for the
>full relevant patent term or for as long as required to implement the
>specifications, whichever occurs first.
>
>Q)  Is the license only provided to those entities holding patents and
>thus able to reciprocate?
>
>A)  NO. You do not have to be a holder of a patent or patent application
>to receive this royalty free license.  The license is available to any
>entity desiring to implement the specifications.  The reciprocity term
>requires an entity, currently holding or subsequently obtaining
>essential patents or applications,  to agree to license those patents
>and applications to IBM under the same terms and conditions, thus the
>term "reciprocal."
>
>Q)  Why did IBM provide a license to ALL patents required by the
>specifications?
>
>A)  IBM wanted to remove any potential confusion regarding
>implementation of the specification.  Since a complete patent search and
>analysis of a large portfolio is very time consuming, IBM wanted to
>provide the assurance
>that our portfolio would not impede adoption of the specifications.
>
>Q) Why did IBM limit the patent license to V1 and V2 of the
>specification?
>
>A) IBM commits to continue to provide a royalty free license to the
>already identified patents for future versions of these CPPA
>specifications. Beyond that, it is not possible to know in advance the
>full scope and details of
>future specifications or OASIS patent policies.  Neither IBM nor anyone
>else can commit to much else at this time. Given IBM's clear statements
>about the importance of OASIS in the global standardization process, IBM
>will continue to evaluate specifications and policies as they evolve and
>/ or develop.
>
>Submitted by Chuck Adams, IBM.
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
>manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>