Some thoughts on IPR and EML

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

Ahead of our agenda item for the 21st - I thought it
useful to have some discussion on the current
OASIS IPR options.

Caveat - I have made my dissatisfaction with the
current IPR options clear on a number of channels,
so I'm starting from that basis.  However - I am
seeing that the EML work offers insights here, that
are not unique to the EML work, but others TCs
also have similar needs.

I would offer that OASIS EML by its very nature 
has to completely independent and neutral as a 
trusted voting process method and supporting 
XML formats.

It's inconceivable IMHO that the EU, UN or any 
other government body would adopt a trusted 
practice that is dependent on some IPR from 
some company somewhere.

Similarly the EML itself needs to be implementable
by any company anywhere - without need for
licensing arrangements.

Now one could argue that the OASIS IPR policy
facilitates that - by being in line with current 
international IPR practice - however I believe
the reality is somewhat different.  Even the mere
notion that there could be an EML that had IPR
associated with it - by whatever means - I believe
would be fatally damaging to the use of the
specification - in the eyes of potential adopters.

Whereas - a position similar to that for OSI (Open
Source Institute) licensing - that precludes the ability 
to add IPR style licensing requirements is what people 
would expect for an EML or similar specification.

Just my 2 tuppence hap'nys worth.

DW