[ebxml-cppa] voting conf call Friday am (US time) and IBM patent claims

[James Bryce Clark <jbc@lawyer.com>]

This is a reminder that on Friday morning we will discuss and probably 
finish (by action or inaction) any TC action regarding the meaning/effect 
of TC approval of the CPA spec in spite of the unexpected IBM claims.

I think we should decide what to do volitionally, rather than allow it to 
happen by default.  Please join us tomorrow (details below), as we have not 
been reliably reaching quorum lately.  If you are a voting member and 
unable to attend, please advise the list of your views.  Regards    Jamie Clark

>To: "Cppalist (E-mail)" <ebxml-cppa@lists.oasis-open.org>
>From: Dale Moberg
>Subject: [ebxml-cppa] Agenda for OASIS ebXML CPPA teleconference October 18,
>  2002 8 AM Pacific 11 Eastern
>
>Phone numbers:
>866-257-0472
>720-587-0509 (international)
>*6271676* (access code, include asterisks)

>Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2002 22:05:43 -0700
>From: James Bryce Clark <jbc@lawyer.com>
>Subject: [ebxml-cppa] Action item regarding TC comment on IBM claims
>
>*** [snip]
>====
>DRAFT STATEMENT
>
>The ebXML CPPA Technical Committee unanimously approved its 2.[0] 
>specification for submission to the OASIS membership as a candidate 
>standard.   We have no reservations regarding the substantive technical 
>quality of the work.  However, in the midst of our own review process, we 
>received an unexpected IPR declaration of patent claims made by IBM in 
>March 2002.  Substantial public reactions and several rounds of discussion 
>followed.  IBM issued and posted an improved revised declaration on May 
>16, 2002, and in response to further questions, provided supplemental 
>explanatory text on May 30th.
>
>We have made significant progress in discussions with IBM and the ebXML 
>community, with effective assistance from OASIS staff.   Ultimately we 
>voted unanimously on May 31 to advance the specification, based on our 
>assessment that the issues raised by the claims are being negotiated 
>appropriately, and that IBM is working with OASIS in good faith to attempt 
>to define final terms satisfactory for the broad user community intended 
>for ebXML.  However, not all of the issues are yet resolved.  Our vote to 
>advance the standard does not imply an evaluation of IBM's claims, nor an 
>endorsement or guarantee of the commercial suitability of the eventual IPR 
>terms.
>
>The TC is concerned about several aspects of the May 2002 IPR 
>declarations.    Earlier disclosure of the claims, which existed during 
>the phase 1 ebXML work but were not disclosed until after its approval, 
>might have permitted easier resolution.  The May 2002 declarations retain 
>a written license application requirement (which is not always included in 
>similar circumstances), and do not permit development of derivative works 
>from the specification.  These strictures have caused several current 
>significant open source development efforts to postpone work, and may 
>impair ebXML toolmaking generally.  EbXML's original requirements focused 
>on wide deployment and SME needs, and sought to create freely available 
>and unencumbered technologies.  We recommend that OASIS review the 
>suitability of encumbered standards, types of implementation licenses, and 
>requirements for timely claim disclosure, in standards such as ebXML that 
>are intended for wide public adoption.
>
>DRAFT
>====

~ James Bryce Clark
~ Chair, American Bar Association Business Law Subcommittee on E-Commerce
~  www.abanet.org/buslaw/cyber/ecommerce/ecommerce.html
~ 1 310 293 6739  jbc@lawyer.com