[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: FW: Future IPR mode of DSS TC
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0080_01C70722.85B78D70 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit First, the authoritative document is here: http://www.oasis-open.org/who/intellectualproperty.php It would be best to have your own attorney look at it. The relevant part is section 10. All IPR terms only apply to IP which covers essential claims. If the IP only provides a better way to do something, the IPR commitment does not apply. 1. Under RF on limited terms There can be no royalty (money). You can require reciprocal license. You can suspend the license against somebody who sues you. You can require the reasonable and customary terms for operations and maintenance, including choice of law and dispute resolution. (This does not mean costs, it means you can chose what court [state or country] they must sue you in.) 2. Under RF on RAND terms There can be no royalty (money). You can require any other reasonable and non-discriminatory terms, including the ones above and others. (Note that what terms are reasonable and non-discriminatory is by no means settled law.) 3. Under RAND You can require any reasonable and non-discriminatory terms, specifically including payment of a reasonable and non-discriminatory royalty (money). Hal > -----Original Message----- > From: Nick Pope [mailto:nickpope@secstan.com] > Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2006 4:17 PM > To: kuehne@trustable.de > Cc: 'juan carlos cruellas'; Hal Lockhart > Subject: RE: Future IPR mode of DSS TC > > Hal - is what I say correct?? > > Not sure I understand it either. > > The RAND - can include payment under reasonable terms > > The RF RAND I believe licensing regarding "Essential Claims" is ".. > without > payment" but licensing beyond that which is in the basic RF requirements > (?? > essential claims) can be under RAND. > > RF on limited terms only allow charges relating to "operation or > maintenance > of the license relationship, including the following: choice of law and > dispute resolution." Which I presume mean legal costs. > > I may, however, got this completely wrong. > > Hal - can you help? > > Nick > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Andreas Kuehne [mailto:akuehne@yahoo.com] > > Sent: 09 November 2006 19:55 > > To: Nick Pope > > Cc: juan carlos cruellas > > Subject: RE: Future IPR mode of DSS TC > > > > > > > As discussed at the last DSS meeting we are informally polling all the > > > voting members of DSS to confirm: > > > > > > > > > > > > a) The preferred IPR mode to be adopted by DSS for future work > > > > > > > > > > > > b) Are there any modes by which you would vote NO if proposed by a > > > majority of the members. > > > > > > > > > > > > A response before the next DSS meeting on 13th November would be > > welcomed. > > > > Nick, I read the three modes but I'm not quite sure that I get this > legal > > stuff quite right. Is > > there a mode where money is involved when using our standard ? > > What are the differences between all three modes in easy words ? > > > > Sorry to nag you with this > > > > Andreas > > > ------=_NextPart_000_0080_01C70722.85B78D70 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> <HTML> <HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; = charset=3Dus-ascii"> <META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version = 6.5.7036.0"> <TITLE>RE: Future IPR mode of DSS TC</TITLE> </HEAD> <BODY> <!-- Converted from text/plain format --> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2>First, the authoritative document is here:</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2><A = HREF=3D"http://www.oasis-open.org/who/intellectualproperty.php";>http://ww= w.oasis-open.org/who/intellectualproperty.php</A></FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2>It would be best to have your own attorney look at it. = The relevant part</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>is section 10. </FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2>All IPR terms only apply to IP which covers essential = claims. If the IP</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>only provides a better way to do something, the IPR = commitment does not</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>apply.</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2>1. Under RF on limited terms</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2>There can be no royalty (money).</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2>You can require reciprocal license.</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2>You can suspend the license against somebody who sues = you.</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2>You can require the reasonable and customary terms for = operations and</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>maintenance, including choice of law and dispute = resolution. (This does</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>not mean costs, it means you can chose what court = [state or country]</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>they must sue you in.)</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2>2. Under RF on RAND terms</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2>There can be no royalty (money).</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2>You can require any other reasonable and = non-discriminatory terms,</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>including the ones above and others. (Note that what = terms are</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>reasonable and non-discriminatory is by no means = settled law.)</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2>3. Under RAND</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2>You can require any reasonable and non-discriminatory = terms,</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>specifically including payment of a reasonable and = non-discriminatory</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>royalty (money).</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Hal</FONT> </P> <BR> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2>> -----Original Message-----</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> From: Nick Pope [<A = HREF=3D"mailto:nickpope@secstan.com";>mailto:nickpope@secstan.com</A>]</FO= NT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2006 4:17 PM</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> To: kuehne@trustable.de</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Cc: 'juan carlos cruellas'; Hal Lockhart</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Subject: RE: Future IPR mode of DSS TC</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Hal - is what I say correct??</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Not sure I understand it either.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> The RAND - can include payment under reasonable = terms</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> The RF RAND I believe licensing regarding = "Essential Claims" is "..</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> without</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> payment" but licensing beyond that which is = in the basic RF</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>requirements</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> (??</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> essential claims) can be under RAND.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> RF on limited terms only allow charges relating = to "operation or</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> maintenance</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> of the license relationship, including the = following: choice of law</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>and</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> dispute resolution." Which I presume mean = legal costs.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> I may, however, got this completely = wrong.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Hal - can you help?</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Nick</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > -----Original Message-----</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > From: Andreas Kuehne [<A = HREF=3D"mailto:akuehne@yahoo.com";>mailto:akuehne@yahoo.com</A>]</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > Sent: 09 November 2006 19:55</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > To: Nick Pope</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > Cc: juan carlos cruellas</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > Subject: RE: Future IPR mode of DSS = TC</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> ></FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> ></FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > > As discussed at the last DSS meeting = we are informally polling all</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>the</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > > voting members of DSS to = confirm:</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > ></FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > ></FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > ></FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > > a) The preferred IPR mode = to be adopted by DSS for future work</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > ></FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > ></FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > ></FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > > b) Are there any modes by = which you would vote NO if proposed by</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>a</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > > majority of the members.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > ></FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > ></FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > ></FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > > A response before the next DSS meeting = on 13th November would be</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > welcomed.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> ></FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > Nick, I read the three modes but I'm not = quite sure that I get this</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> legal</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > stuff quite right. Is</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > there a mode where money is involved when = using our standard ?</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > What are the differences between all three = modes in easy words ?</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> ></FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > Sorry to nag you with this</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> ></FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > Andreas</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> </P> </BODY> </HTML> ------=_NextPart_000_0080_01C70722.85B78D70-- This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of this correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please delete it from your system and notify the System Administrator at Thales e-Security +44 (0)1844 201800 or mail postmaster@thales-esecurity.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]