RE: [wsbpel] The sad tail of obtaining licenses for BPEL4WS 1.1mailto:eduardo.gutentag@oasis-open.org

["John Evdemon" <jevdemon@microsoft.com>]

Hello all,

Of the five companies that contributed to the spec, only Siebel has yet
to issue a general license agreement.  I contacted Siebel again last
night and hope to have a final answer available soon (I am targeting the
F2F).  

I am also seeking legal advice to help streamline this process.  

Please contact me with your licensing experiences - I am very interested
in getting these issues resolved.

John

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve Ross-Talbot [mailto:steve@enigmatec.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 12:57 AM
> To: Ugo Corda
> Cc: ws bpel tc; Danny van der Rijn
> Subject: Re: [wsbpel] The sad tail of obtaining licenses for
> BPEL4WS 1.1mailto:eduardo.gutentag@oasis-open.org
> 
> Hi Ugo,
> 
> like many small companies and some big ones too we are
> interested in
> getting product out based on BPEL4WS1.1. Let's call it a
> teaser for the
> real thing. We rely, as a smaller company, on being fleet of
> foot. Alas
> the problems with licensing BPEL4WS1.1 so that we are in the
> clear (and
> when you are small this is so very important) reduce our
> ability to be
> fleet of foot. Our customers, having been aware of the
> licensing
> problems in the TC, are unwilling to try the stuff unless we
> shoulder
> the license burden. Given we cannot even get this sorted out
> it
> difficult to build a business around BPEL until the mess is
> cleared up.
> 
> All very depressing ....
> 
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Steve T
> 
> On 1 Dec 2003, at 21:40, Ugo Corda wrote:
> 
> > Steve,
> >
> > I agree that the IPR issue is an important one, but I don't
> fully
> > understand how clarifying it in the case of the BPEL 1.1
> submission
> > would basically change our outlook. I would imagine that
> your company
> > does not want to implement the original BPEL 1.1, but rather
> the spec
> > that comes out of this TC (BPEL 1.2 or whatever else it will
> be
> > called). In that respect, it's simply part of OASIS rules
> that we
> > cannot have a final word on the IPR status of the resulting
> spec until
> > the time it is finalized.
> >
> > Ugo
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Steve Ross-Talbot [mailto:steve@enigmatec.net]
> >> Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 1:32 PM
> >> To: Danny van der Rijn
> >> Cc: ws bpel tc
> >> Subject: Re: [wsbpel] The sad tail of obtaining licenses
> for BPEL4WS
> >> 1.1mailto:eduardo.gutentag@oasis-open.org
> >>
> >>
> >> Danny (and all members)
> >>
> >> I have it on good authority that some large commercial
> concerns have
> >> been tracking all of this. And when I say large I really do
> >> mean large.
> >> They are users (all of them) and are not impressed. In fact
> >> their take
> >> is to not use BPEL at all until this is sorted out. This of
> course
> >> leaves us smaller companies, who are helping to get this
> work
> >> ratified
> >> as a standard, in a pretty terrible position. What are we
> to
> >> do? Ignore
> >> BPEL and try something else? Do nothing in this space
> commercially
> >> until this license debacle is fixed? All the while we are
> forced to
> >> wait because of commercial pressured those companies with
> bigger
> >> pockets can make headway.
> >>
> >> I must say I am very unimpressed and suggest that Oasis and
> >> the authors
> >> sort this out as a matter of urgency.
> >>
> >> Best
> >>
> >> Steve T
> >>
> >>
> >> On 1 Dec 2003, at 17:30, Danny van der Rijn wrote:
> >>
> >>> OASIS still owes us a status report on how they're doing
> at
> >>> negotiating with
> >>> the authors.  they were a no-show at our last face-to-face
> >> when that
> >>> was on
> >>> the agenda.  one question on my mind is Can we produce a
> >> standard where
> >>> licensing is in this kind of shape?
> >>>
> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>> From: "Steve Ross-Talbot" <steve@enigmatec.net>
> >>> To: "ws bpel tc" <wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org>
> >>> Cc: <eduardo.gutentag@oasis-open.org>;
> >> <jeff.mischkinsky@oracle.com>;
> >>> <patrick.gannon@oasis-open.org>
> >>> Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 8:12 AM
> >>> Subject: [wsbpel] The sad tail of obtaining licenses for
> BPEL4WS
> >>> 1.1mailto:eduardo.gutentag@oasis-open.org
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Dear all,
> >>>>
> >>>> A sad tail about the of licensing BPEL4WS1.1.
> >>>>
> >>>> As some of you may remember  the issues of licensing and
> license
> >>>> mechanisms were raised at the start of the TC. We were
> all assured
> >>>> that even though there are 5 authors of the BPEL4WS1.1
> >> specification -
> >>>> the base for the TC -  we should not worry. It would all
> >> be fine and
> >>>> the authors would figure out a way to ensure that those
> who are
> >>>> interested would be able to obtain licenses without any
> real
> >>>> hinderance.
> >>>>
> >>>> So mid Sept2003 I embarked on license discovery. A little
> known
> >>>> process
> >>>> to obtain the 5 license agreements from the 5 authors of
> the
> >>>> BPEL4WS1.1
> >>>> specification.
> >>>>
> >>>> On the web I managed to get licenses from Microsoft
> >> (thanks) and BEA
> >>>> (thanks). And within a month from SAP (thanks to them
> also) too.
> >>>>
> >>>> IBM and Siebel had no web available licensing (as far as
> I could
> >>>> tell).
> >>>> I sent in a request to IBM late October, having waited
> >> passively for
> >>>> some information about the licenses from the TC, and
> >> (several people
> >>>> and emails later) I am still waiting for a license from
> IBM. The
> >>>> latest
> >>>> news, despite the fact that I have an outstanding email
> >> into IBM, is
> >>>> that a license agreement from them is on the Oasis
> website
> >> (dated June
> >>>> 2003!). Why was this not pointed out in October you may
> >> ask? A case of
> >>>> the X-files and standards you may think.
> >>>>
> >>>> With Siebel the plot thickens. Finally I got to someone
> (19th
> >>>> November)
> >>>> who seemed to know about the license issues. But ... and
> I
> >> know this
> >>>> sounds like I made it up .... I finally get a response
> that says:
> >>>>
> >>>> "I should have pointed you to Oasis rather than Diane
> >> Jordan at IBM."
> >>>>
> >>>> Which brings me all the way back to the original email I
> >> sent to Diane
> >>>> late in October. Now I feel like Bill Murray in "Ground
> Hog Day".
> >>>>
> >>>> It is a sad tail of how licenses and standards do not
> mix.
> >>>>
> >>>> I am now at a loss as to how to proceed. Seems like we
> now have a
> >>>> deadlock. The TC chairs thinking it is the authors
> >> responsibility and
> >>>> at least one of the authors thinking it is Oasis's
> responsibility.
> >>>>
> >>>> If anyone our there has actually succeeded in getting all
> 5 license
> >>>> agreements could they share the secret of their success
> >> with the group
> >>>> so that we may all contribute on an equal footing.
> >>>>
> >>>> As to what I think should be done as a minimum ... it is
> >> simple. Oasis
> >>>> should own the contact points for such license agreements
> and the
> >>>> authors should sign-up to ensuring that this sort of
> information is
> >>>> sorted out *before* they start a TC so that we can play
> on a level
> >>>> playing field.
> >>>>
> >>>> Best regards
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Steve Ross-Talbot
> >>>> Chief Scientist Enigmatec Corp.
> >>>>
> >>>> This email is confidential and may be protected by legal
> >> privilege.
> >>>> If you
> >>> are not the intended recipient,  please do not copy or
> >> disclose its
> >>> content
> >>> but  delete the email and contact the sender immediately.
> >> Whilst we run
> >>> antivirus software on all internet emails we are not
> liable
> >> for any
> >>> loss or
> >>> damage. The recipient is advised to run their own
> antivirus
> >> software.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> 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/wsbpel/members/
> >>> leave_workgroup.php.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 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/wsbpel/members/
> >>> leave_workgroup.php.
> >>>
> >>> This email is confidential and may be protected by legal
> >> privilege. If
> >>> you are not the intended recipient,  please do not copy or
> >> disclose
> >>> its content but  delete the email and contact the sender
> >> immediately.
> >>> Whilst we run antivirus software on all internet emails we
> are not
> >>> liable for any loss or damage. The recipient is advised to
> >> run their
> >>> own antivirus software.
> >>>
> >>
> >> This email is confidential and may be protected by legal
> >> privilege. If you are not the intended recipient,  please
> do
> >> not copy or disclose its content but  delete the email and
> >> contact the sender immediately. Whilst we run antivirus
> >> software on all internet emails we are not liable for any
> >> loss or damage. The recipient is advised to run their own
> >> antivirus software.
> >>
> >>
> >> 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/wsbpel/members/le
> > ave_workgroup.php.
> >
> >
> > 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/wsbpel/members/
> > leave_workgroup.php.
> >
> >
> 
> This email is confidential and may be protected by legal
> privilege. If you are not the intended recipient,  please do
> not copy or disclose its content but  delete the email and
> contact the sender immediately. Whilst we run antivirus
> software on all internet emails we are not liable for any loss
> or damage. The recipient is advised to run their own antivirus
> software.
> 
> 
> 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/wsbpel/members/leave_workgroup.php
> .
>