RE: [dss] FW: [dss-comment] Public Comment

["Nick Pope" <pope@secstan.com>]

I propose the following response to the IPR question raised below.

"Whilst it is not possible to make definitive statements regarding IPR we
are not aware of any company requiring payment of royalties for use of the
DSS core protocol."

Nick Pope



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nick Pope [mailto:pope@secstan.com]
> Sent: 21 March 2005 17:40
> To: OASIS DSS TC
> Subject: [dss] FW: [dss-comment] Public Comment
>
>
> Forwarding FYI
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: comment-form@oasis-open.org [mailto:comment-form@oasis-open.org]
> Sent: 21 March 2005 11:12
> To: dss-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [dss-comment] Public Comment
>
>
> Comment from: arm@dif.um.es
>
> Hello!
>
> I'm writing you because I would like to comment that in the new release of
> the document, it is commented that in the enveloping signature there is a
> new attribute ObjectId. However, this attribute is missing in the new
> schema.
>
> The other comment is that I have some doubts about IPR statements. I have
> being seen them, and I would like to know if the implementation of this
> specification supposes the payment of some royalties to the
> enterprise that
> claims some IPR.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Antonio.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dss-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dss-help@lists.oasis-open.org
>
>
>