RE: [chairs] reminder to chairs: OASIS IPR Policy member review

["Drummond Reed" <drummond.reed@cordance.net>]

Karl,

I might be the first one to say this, and feel free to hit me with a giant
brickbat if you think I'm nuts, but in the generally clear new IPR policy
documents, one terminology issue has left me completely baffled.

"Unrestricted RF" vs. "Restricted RF" modes.

When I first saw these terms, I was inituitively certain of their meaning:
the first means royalty-free with no other licensing restrictions and the
second means royalty-free but with the possibility of other licensing
restrictions that still need to be negotiated with the licensor.

Imagine my shock when reading the IPR FAQ documents that my intuitive
understanding was 180 degrees wrong.

"Unrestricted RF" actually means "royalty-free but with no restrictions on
the LICENSOR to also require negotation of other terms from licensees" and
"Restricted RF" means "royalty-free plus the LICENSOR is also restricted
from requiring negotation of any other licensing terms from licensees".

Exactly the opposite of what I thought.

While it's possible to screw one's head around hard enough to understand
these definitions, in trying to write messages to my two TCs to explain the
need for an upcoming IPR mode vote, I found myself having to do triple
backflips to explain why two IPR modes had these incredibly confusing names.
I finally stopped and wrote you this message instead.

Am I truly the first one to bring this up? Wouldn't it completely avoid this
issue to have just called these modes "Partial RF" and "Full RF"? Or
"Encumbered RF" and "Unencumbered RF"? 

At least then it would avoid the potential 180 degree misinterpretation of
the current terms.

=Drummond 



-----Original Message-----
From: Karl F. Best [mailto:karl.best@oasis-open.org] 
Sent: Friday, July 30, 2004 11:55 AM
To: chairs@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [chairs] reminder to chairs: OASIS IPR Policy member review

TC chairs:

On 9 July OASIS announced to its membership a draft IPR Policy that has 
been developed by our Board, and requested that members review and 
provide comment on this draft. (See 
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/members/200407/msg00002.html)

One of the documents in this review is the proposed Transition Policy, 
which describes how TCs will transition to the new IPR Policy by 
selecting an IPR mode to operate under, after which the OASIS members 
(organizations and individuals) represented in the TC will vote to 
ratify that selection.

In addition to the other issues in the IPR Policy that you individually 
and your companies may be interested in, I would also appreciate your 
TCs looking at, discussing, and commenting on the transition to the new 
IPR Policy, as well as any other parts of the Policy that will affect 
the day-to-day operations of the TC.

-Karl

=================================================================
Karl F. Best
Vice President, OASIS
office  +1 978.667.5115 x206     mobile +1 978.761.1648
karl.best@oasis-open.org      http://www.oasis-open.org