OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

chairs message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Re: [chairs] IPR Transition Policy


> 1) I was informed that there will be no transition for TC process
> document.  The concern I have for this is that this changes the voting
> rights of various members who either through geography or expense are
> unable to join in meetings of TC and therefore would lose the voting
> rights that for some TC are managed in a more flexible manner at the
> chairs discretion.  For example people may be able to do F2F but not a
> weekly call.

You're correct that there is no transition *process* to get TCs from the 
current TC Process to the new TC Process. But there is a transition 
period, if you want to call it that. The draft TC Process has been out 
for review for the past couple of weeks, and once approved by the Board 
will not be effective for some period of time. As the target effective 
date for the TC Process and IPR Policy are some time in January, 
everyone has at least three months before the revisions become effective.

Nobody will be loosing rights because of this change; those with voting 
rights (the current Member) will retain them (i.e. will become a Voting 
Member). Retention of voting rights through meeting attendance will not 
change; you still need to maintain 2/3 attendance, though you must also 
now return ballots as those count the same as attending meetings. There 
continues to be no difference, for attendance purposes, between a f2f 
and a concall.

The new Member, though it has rights similar to the current Observer, 
requires permission of the person's organization, so we cannot 
automatically transition current Observers to new Members.

> 2) Now we then have a different basis for IPR of a TC that requires
> maybe 100% or 66% of the voting member to agree.  It is quite possible
> that a major contributor that has no voting rights could be affected by
> this policy.  I feel that the right to vote needs to be looked at for
> this one issue of the IPR for the TC.

I'm not certain what you're asking (don't understand your question) but 
I think that it's about the transition. To transition to the new IPR 
Policy, 50% of the organizational and Individual members represented in 
the TC must have signed the new Membership Agreement. Then the 
membership of the TC must select which mode they want to work under, 
then a vote will be held for the organizational and Individual members 
(who will bear the IPR obligations) to ratify that mode selection.

> 3) I am concerned at the hurdles being placed in front of the RF IPR
> models.  We have found that even on TC business that it is very
> difficult to get votes completed.  I therefore think that uninamous
> votes are not a feesable option.  I feel that a super-majority should be
> applied in all cases and that for all options a period of 60 days should
> be given to allow a contributor to remove their contributions should the
> vote not go the way they need.
> 4) I think that it would be useful for OASIS to give a list of RF
> licenses that they feel would fit into the the two categories of RF and
> therefore help 'prime the pump' in those areas. It might be useful for
> OASIS to give an example license for the RAND as well come to think of
> it.
> 5) I know this has been raised but I am concerned about individual
> membership and their position.  As this was the route for my involvement
> in OASIS I feel that this useful soft entry point should be maintained
> and cover for such people should be provided. 

You should probably send these comments to the Board, who have defined 
these policies. We had a member review period on these policies last 
summer, but they have not yet been approved.

> 6) If a TC fails to get 50% of it membership to renew according to the
> new membership details is there any provision to allow the creation of a
> new TC based on a previous TC?

A new TC can be formed at any time. So yes it is possible to form a new 
TC to replace one that has closed due to it being unable to complete the 


> Thanks
> Martin Roberts
> xml designer,
> BT Exact
> e-mail: martin.me.roberts@bt.com
> tel: +44(0) 1473 609785  .

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]