RE: [ciq] IPR Transition ballot - PLEASE READ AND THIS IS IMPORTANT

["David RR Webber \(XML\)" <david@drrw.info>]

Ram,

 

Yes - I know there is no formal requirement to re-visit the charter in the process that OASIS setup.   

 

That's not what we needed to know.

 

However if your charter does not exclude IPR then you are not really voting on what you think you are.  Their IPR option WITHOUT the IPR exclusion in the charter is not really what you think it is at all.   In fact if you are not excluding IPR contributions explicitly then it leaves the door open for types of IPR.

 

In our case however - it seems we already have something in the charter that might be OK in this regard.

 

I'd still be happier if Jamie was affirming that the one-liner in our charter is adequate.  However - I also realize that Jamie does NOT want to be drawn on this - into making a pronouncement one way or the other.

 

Catch22 - so we non-lawyers are left with trusting our gut - because the lawyers don't want to make a commitment. 

 

Lovely.

 

I'm inclined to abstain - because I don't still know at this point if we are properly covered or not?

Thanks, DW

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [ciq] IPR Transition ballot - PLEASE READ AND THIS IS
IMPORTANT
From: "Ram Kumar" <kumar.sydney@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, September 13, 2006 5:51 am
To: "David RR Webber (XML)" <david@drrw.info>
Cc: ciq@lists.oasis-open.org

David,

 

I have spoken to Jamie. There is no requirement of re-visiting the charter to

state the IPR policy of the TC. We agree on the IPR model, vote on it internally

and once we are ready, approach the TC admin to conduct the transition ballot officially.

 

So, let us vote on the ballot.

 

Here is the procedure:

 

1. TC may conduct a vote to submit a Transition Request to operate under the new IPR Policy. The Transition Request must specify one of the IPR Modes under the new IPR Policy as the one under which the TC wishes to operate, and must be approved by a majority of the votes cast by the TC Voting Members (as per regular TC voting procedure) before it can be sent to the TC Administrator.
2. Each Transition Approval Ballot must be preceded by a Transition Request Ballot. There is no limit (other than the time limit specified below in 3.10) to the number of Transition Request and Transition Approval Ballots that a TC may conduct until a Transition Approval Ballot succeeds.
3. Only TC Qualified Members may vote in a Transition Approval ballot, and each may cast only a single vote. The ballot will allow for YES, NO, or ABSTAIN votes.
4. Approval of a Transition Approval Ballot requires i) a minimum of 50% of all TC Qualified Members to vote, ii) no NO votes cast and iii) one or more YES votes.
5. The Transition Approval Ballot is conducted by the TC Administrator, no earlier than 30 days after a Transition Request. The ballot will remain open for a period of fourteen (14) calendar days. The TC Administrator shall notify all TC Qualified Members of the result of the Transition Approval Ballot ("Approval Notification").

 

 

On 9/13/06, David RR Webber (XML) <david@drrw.info > wrote:

Ram,

 

Sigh - I've been trying to get OASIS to sort this out properly with guidance to TCs.

 

What we have found is that the Charter needs to be reviewed to ensure that the charter gives the correct indicator regard the TCs position on accepting contributions only without IPR constraints.

 

The other peice is that since the IPR options were put together a year or so back now - the landscape has moved somewhat - due mainly to folks like Sun adopting defensive-RF licensing as its norm (which is good postive step).

 

However - Eduardo Gutentag of the BOD gave this guidance on the Chairs discuss list in response to my Q's:

 

<snip>

all the TC has to do is to declare *in its charter* that it's an
RF mode based TC. That triggers all the necessary obligations that
apply to contributors and participants; and it also triggers the
character of the obligation that those who send comments to that
TC must agree to abide by in order for the comments to actually make
it to the comments list, thus preventing the contamination of an
RF TC, for instance, with RAND contributions.
</snip>
 

Provided we feel that our charter already includes this in some shape - then we are good - otherwise I feel we need to address this as a first step.

 

Thanks, DW

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [ciq] IPR Transition ballot - PLEASE READ AND THIS IS
IMPORTANT
From: "Ram Kumar" < kumar.sydney@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, September 12, 2006 4:03 pm
To: ciq@lists.oasis-open.org

CIQ TC,

It is time we vote on the IRP transition. The best transition mode to enable
free, open, royalty free standard for users is RF/LIMITED.

For further information on IPR Transition, go to:
http://www.oasis-open.org/who/intellectualproperty.php

If you or your organisation have any issues with CIQ TC transitioning to
RF/LIMITED, please let the TC know now as I am going to call for IPR
Transition Ballot.

Regards,

Ram