RE: [chairs] [Fwd: New requirements on Individual Members]

["June Leung" <June.Leung@FundSERV.com>]

Eduardo, thanks for the reminder.  I've added the IPR review group to this email string.

To add to Steve's point, when an individual is actively involved in a TC and decided to change jobs and the new company is not a member of Oasis; it'll be very difficult to convince/demonstrate to the new company that Oasis is a valuable organization to join.  Even if the company is interested to join, there might be budget constraints to do so immediately.  It'll be a lot easier for that individual to become individual member first and continue their work.   I don't think TC members should be "excluded" when they change jobs.

June Leung
Manager, PKI Department
FundSERV Inc.
1730 130 King St W
Toronto ON M5X 1E5
T. 416.350.2516
F. 416.362.6668 





-----Original Message-----
From: Eduardo Gutentag [mailto:Eduardo.Gutentag@Sun.COM]
Sent: Friday, August 06, 2004 1:07 PM
To: 'OASIS Chairs'
Subject: Re: [chairs] [Fwd: New requirements on Individual Members]


Just a reminder: comments in this list will never be seen by the
Board unless sent (or cc'd) to ipr-member-review@lists.oasis-open.org
It would be a pity if that were to happen...

On 08/06/2004 09:09 AM, Matthew MacKenzie wrote:
> Maybe the problem could be solved by making a new class of member,
> "corporate individual", which may have a time limit on it, or a price which
> is more than "individual".
> 
> -Matt
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Deleys Brandman [mailto:dbrandman@commerce.net] 
> Sent: Friday, August 06, 2004 10:58 AM
> To: Steve Hanna; OASIS Chairs
> Subject: RE: [chairs] [Fwd: New requirements on Individual Members]
> 
> I agree with Steve that the individual is one that is frequently used to
> explore how OASIS is valuable to the larger organization. I would
> support Steve's suggestion. If we need to attach a timetable, like a
> year, that might be a good compromise as well.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve Hanna [mailto:shanna@funk.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 8:48 AM
> To: OASIS Chairs
> Subject: [chairs] [Fwd: New requirements on Individual Members]
> 
> Other OASIS chairs,
> 
> I suspect you may not be aware of the major changes
> in requirements for Individual Members included in
> the recent proposed IPR Policy. Individual Membership
> would no longer be available to anyone whose IP is
> owned by his or her employer (as required by most
> employment agreements).
> 
> Please review my comments below. Whatever your
> opinions on this topic, I encourage you to submit
> comments to ipr-member-review@lists.oasis-open.org
> before the end of the comment period (September 10).
> I also encourage you to inform your TCs of this
> proposed change and encourage your members to submit
> comments on this or any other aspects of the proposed
> revised IPR Policy.
> 
> For your reference, the draft IPR Policy is at
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/members-only/download.php/7
> 515
> and the FAQ is at
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/members-only/download.php/7
> 554
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Steve Hanna
> Co-chair, OASIS PKI TC
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: New requirements on Individual Members
> Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 11:37:14 -0400
> From: Steve Hanna <shanna@funk.com>
> To: ipr-member-review@lists.oasis-open.org
> 
> The new proposed IPR Policy includes a most
> unwelcome and unfortunate change. Here's the text
> in the FAQ that describes it:
> 
> 3.6. Are there changes to the eligibility rules
>       for Individual members?
> 
>       Yes. If an individual's IP is owned by his or her
>       employer, (as is required by most employment agreements),
>       he or she will be unable to continue to participate under
>       the OASIS Individual Membership level.
> 
> In my view, this change would be an awful mistake.
> Here are three reasons why:
> 
> 1) Individual Members are among the most enthusiastic
>     and energetic members of my TC and many others.
> 
> 2) For many organizations, Individual Membership is
>     a path to Organizational Membership. They start
>     by having one Individual Member. Then several
>     more join and their management sees that OASIS
>     is important to their business.
> 
> 3) Making this change would make OASIS less open,
>     ensuring that only organizations or unemployed
>     individuals can participate.
> 
> The FAQ states that this change is being made "to
> ensure that Contributions have clear licensing
> obligations and that licenses are available to
> implement all OASIS Standards and specifications."
> 
> I support this goal but I think it could better
> be achieved by requiring Individual Members whose
> IP is owned by their employers to have those
> employers sign documents agreeing to the
> necessary obligations.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Steve Hanna
> Co-chair, OASIS PKI TC
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Eduardo Gutentag               |         e-mail: eduardo.gutentag@Sun.COM
Web Technologies and Standards |         Phone:  +1 510 550 4616 x31442
Sun Microsystems Inc.          |         W3C AC Rep / OASIS BoD