OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

office message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Re: [office] How about an interoperability Subcommittee?

I'd be glad to chat, Alex. But it would be helpful if you could
provide a link to the IPR language for UOML so I can look at that
before we chat.

Best regards,


On 5/8/07, Alex Wang <alexwang@sursen.com> wrote:
> Marbux,
> The RAND terms of UOML is very similiar as RF mode. You can't find it
> because OASIS delete the detailed terms from the charter. I believe it
> can meet the requiement  of FOSS.  I'd like to have further discussion
> with you individually on this topic.
> -Alex
> -----Original Message-----
> From: marbux [mailto:marbux@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 11:29 AM
> To: Alex Wang
> Cc: office@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re: [office] How about an interoperability Subcommittee?
> Alex, RAND is a big barrier to the extent it would impact ODF. It's
> widely implemented by free and open source software (FOSS) with
> licensing that does not permit RAND ingredients. And many of those apps
> have so many developers who have contributed code that it simply isn't
> feasible to locate all of them to sign papers necessary to change the
> software licenses, let alone persuade them to do so.
> So the bottom line here is that there are legal aspects to
> interoperability as well as technical aspects; that is, unsolvable
> interoperability barriers can exist at the legal level as well as the
> software level.  IPR conflicts are becoming far more common as the
> number of standards increase. So while I still am not sure such problems
> could be overcome, I am quite certain that to the extent an IPR conflict
> exists, it isn't feasible to change the ODF IPR. So it would be your
> project that would have to have its IPR scheme altered.
> I don't say that intending any disrespect for your project's IPR or
> intending to imply that ODF's IPR scheme is superior (although I have a
> personal preference for non-encumbered technology). It's just that I
> don't see any feasible way to change the ODF IPR scheme.
> Best regards,
> Marbux

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]