Hello Michael and Andrew. Scott forwarded this to me; apologies that this took a couple of days to touch and reply.
I have inserted suggestions into the Google Doc draft agreement. (A fixed copy as annotated also is attached.)
THOSE edit suggestions presumably are visible to your contractor, but THESE email comments are not.
I remember Kegan. So:
- if Contractor gives you code and code documentation, and you use it, of course it's freely usable as part of MDS, due to your overall licensing. (See Section 10 on page 5.)
- And that may be all their contract drafter is worried about.
- But if Kegan also shipped other non-code work, like analysis or critique, the CC-BY-4 terms do not necessarily apply.ÂÂYou might want control over such material, to be exclusively provided by Compiler for OMF's use (as the original contract form said). See my edits to his new "License" clause in Exhibit A on page 10.
- However, if you don't care about control, and are happy to have him contribute all of his work to you in the open, you could accept the rest of it under CC-BY-4 terms as well ... and delete the [bracketed] clauses ... as long as you are willing to have your materials permanently carry his attribution (the "BY" condition).
regards, Jamie
mobile 1-310-293-6739
James Bryce ClarkGeneral Counsel & CPO OASIS Open |
|
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Michael Schnuerle <michael@openmobilityfoundation.org>
Subject: Fwd: [Compiler Partners] Re: MDS 2.0 schema work proposal
To: omf-staff <omf-staff@openmobilityfoundation.org>, Scott McGrath <scott.mcgrath@oasis-open.org>
Cc: Cathie Mayo <cathie.mayo@oasis-open.org>
From: Michael Schnuerle <michael@openmobilityfoundation.org>
Subject: Fwd: [Compiler Partners] Re: MDS 2.0 schema work proposal
To: omf-staff <omf-staff@openmobilityfoundation.org>, Scott McGrath <scott.mcgrath@oasis-open.org>
Cc: Cathie Mayo <cathie.mayo@oasis-open.org>
Hi Scott,
Back in September 2021 we had a companyÂcalled Compiler do some MDS work for us. We are asking them to do some more work and have a scope of work and agreement draft.Â
They did bring up some valid questions about the licensing and ownership language in the agreement. Here are their suggested edits from their lawyer since the OMF will not own their work and the work is open source.Â
Let me know what you think and if this is acceptable, or feel free to leave comments and suggested edits of your own directly in the document.Â