Thanks for your help in clarifying these issues. I do
however have some remaining concerns. For the sake of those of us who are not
going to search the LA website for press releases, please place all relevant
documents on the SS TC document repository. By this I mean,
if documents are in the repository that contain statements about IPR that are
modified by other documents they should also be available in the repository.
<Prateek>
I agree
that we need to ensure all relevant documents should be available from our
repository. You will also appreciate that a functioning TC with dozens of
documents will not always be uptodate. I will work
with Rob to ensure this is the case.
</Prateek>
I've never said that there were IPR conditions that
have been violated. I said that it remains unclear, based on the email message
that accompanied the submission, whether the submission meets the conditions
for OASIS. The specific item that I do not see fully acknowledged in the email
message is Item #1 in Section OASIS.IPR.3.1. I acknowledge that this may be
covered in documents that are not easily found on the SS TC website. Perhaps
you can be kind enough to show me where?
<Prateek>
Thanks
for pointing to a specific section. My understanding is that the grant from
Liberty Alliance covers precisely such rights: to create derivative works from
Liberty Alliance 1.1 and disseminate such works. I will
summarize the relevant links where such rights are granted.
</Prateek>
I don't think I've suggested that the OASIS Board needs
to oversee every action of the TC. However, in the case where the TC is placing
documents into its repository that have unclear IPR restrictions it would be
helpful if the OASIS Board made some statement as to whether these documents
have been determined to have met the criteria for submission to OASIS.
<Prateek>
This is a
somewhat broader issue than just the functioning of the SSTC. I can see that
the board might play an additional constructive role here.
</Prateek>
Thanks again,
Mike
|
"Mishra, Prateek"
<pmishra@netegrity.com>
10/18/2003 03:34 PM
|
To: Michael
McIntosh/Watson/IBM@IBMUS, "Mishra, Prateek"
<pmishra@netegrity.com>
cc: "'Jeff.Hodges@sun.com
'" <Jeff.Hodges@sun.com>, "'security-services@lists.oasis-open.org
'" <security-services@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: RE:
[security-services] Groups - liberty-architecture-overview-v1
.1.pdf uploaded
|
Hi Prateek,
Thanks for sending this, I missed it before. It appears that this unsigned
email message comes from several OASIS SS TC members who also happen to be LA
members. Has the TC received any definitive statements directly from the LA
Board?
<Prateek>
This is a matter of public record. Please see:
http://www.projectliberty.org/press/releases/2003-04-11.html
The formal SSTC minutes of Aprl 15, 2003 describes the submission
and acceptance of the contribution.
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/security-services/200304/msg00128.html
</Prateek>
Also, even if this submission has received the LA Board's approval it remains
unclear whether it meets the conditions for submission under OASIS. There are
several specific conditions required for submission to OASIS that do not appear
to have been addressed by the email message. Please see:
http://www.oasis-open.org/who/intellectualproperty.php
<Prateek>
I am sorry I do not follow this line of reasoning. What are
the specific conditions that have not been met? To my knowledge all of the
conditions in http://www.oasis-open.org/who/intellectualproperty.php
are met by the submissions. Could you please point to the specific portions
(section numbers, text) of http://www.oasis-open.org/who/intellectualproperty.php
that you believe have been violated?
</Prateek>
Has the OASIS Board made it's position clear on this specific set of documents?
I suggest that any relevant statements related to IPR be collocated with the
documents in the archive.
<Prateek>
I am sorry I do not understand your question. The SSTC is an
autonomous group that functions under the rules given in http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process.php. Are you
suggesting that the OASIS board must give an opinion on day-to-day TC
decisions?
</Prateek>
Thanks,
Mike
|
"Mishra, Prateek"
<pmishra@netegrity.com>
10/17/2003 09:31 PM
|
To: Michael
McIntosh/Watson/IBM@IBMUS, "'Jeff.Hodges@sun.com '"
<Jeff.Hodges@sun.com>
cc: "'security-services@lists.oasis-open.org
'" <security-services@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: RE:
[security-services] Groups - liberty-architecture-overview-v1
.1.pdf uploaded
|
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/security-services/200304/msg00072.html
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael McIntosh
To: Jeff.Hodges@sun.com
Cc: security-services@lists.oasis-open.org
Sent: 10/17/2003
8:52 PM
Subject: Re: [security-services] Groups -
liberty-architecture-overview-v1.1.pdf uploaded
Can someone please show me where this TC has been given the rights to
prepare derivative works or reproduce portions of this document?
This document explicitly forbids these actions.
Thanks,
Mike
To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the
OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/security-services/members/leave_workgroup.php.