RE: [office] How about an interoperability Subcommittee?

["Alex Wang" <alexwang@sursen.com>]

Marbux,
The RAND terms of UOML is very similiar as RF mode. You can't find it
because OASIS delete the detailed terms from the charter. I believe it
can meet the requiement  of FOSS.  I'd like to have further discussion
with you individually on this topic.

-Alex

-----Original Message-----
From: marbux [mailto:marbux@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 11:29 AM
To: Alex Wang
Cc: office@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [office] How about an interoperability Subcommittee?


Alex, RAND is a big barrier to the extent it would impact ODF. It's
widely implemented by free and open source software (FOSS) with
licensing that does not permit RAND ingredients. And many of those apps
have so many developers who have contributed code that it simply isn't
feasible to locate all of them to sign papers necessary to change the
software licenses, let alone persuade them to do so.

So the bottom line here is that there are legal aspects to
interoperability as well as technical aspects; that is, unsolvable
interoperability barriers can exist at the legal level as well as the
software level.  IPR conflicts are becoming far more common as the
number of standards increase. So while I still am not sure such problems
could be overcome, I am quite certain that to the extent an IPR conflict
exists, it isn't feasible to change the ODF IPR. So it would be your
project that would have to have its IPR scheme altered.

I don't say that intending any disrespect for your project's IPR or
intending to imply that ODF's IPR scheme is superior (although I have a
personal preference for non-encumbered technology). It's just that I
don't see any feasible way to change the ODF IPR scheme.

Best regards,

Marbux