Re: Agenda for next Advisory Council meeting, Monday, 27 September, 11 am EST, 5 pm CEST, 4 pm BST

[Deborah Bryant <dbryant@redhat.com>]

Hi Jaimie, where do you see someone claiming it's FOSS? I'm reading OSI-approved licenses are insufficientÂfor data (don't disagree) so they floated something else. This topic is important to me so I don't want to miss it.

I have an adjacent concern, and that is lack of explicit data governance. We (Red Hat) joined another data-related foundation project recently and see this as a big gap. Who is doing the best thinking these days on data governance?

Deb

On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 1:18 PM Jamie Clark <jamie.clark@oasis-open.org> wrote:

 Well, Heck. Yes, thanks Chris, the CDLA (https://cdla.dev/). In this case, it's an active request, and came up in the context of projects which also generate data, in the form of some exemplars, content or formats which could be appended to a technical guidance document within the scope of our license assurances.Â

 Think dummy content or AI training content. Not irrelevant as we're launching some AI projects.

 Apparently it was important to the CDLA folks to have the "results" of data explicitly excluded from the dataset. Not sure of provenance, Linux Foundation I guess. Offering no views on the license here, just noting an instance of a non-OSI license that someone claims is FOSS, and under which some might want us to allow our projects to open repos. Regards Jamie

James Bryce Clark, General Counsel, OASIS Open, setting the standard for open collaborationÂ

On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 9:31 AM Christopher B Ferris <chrisfer@us.ibm.com> wrote:

Hi Jamie,

Â

Assume you meant CDLA? Not really open source, but rather open data. An interesting thought for OASIS to also be supportive of open data projects, or projects that host an open dataset licensed under CDLA.

Â

CLAs are indeed a pain and an inhibitor to drive-by PRs (bug fixes mostly) because you need to engage some lawyer (ahem). I can see CLA for OASIS members who join an Open Project and DCO for contributions as being sufficient for most cases.

Â

My $0.02

Â

Cheers,

Christopher Ferris IBM Fellow, CTO Open Technology
twitter: @christo4ferris | phone: +1 508 667 0402 | blog:Âhttps://developer.ibm.com/profiles/chrisfer/

IBM Open Source white paper: https://developer.ibm.com/articles/cl-open-architecture-update/
Â

Â

Â

----- Original message -----
From: "Jamie Clark" <jamie.clark@oasis-open.org>
To: op-advisory-council@lists.oasis-open.org
Cc: "Guy Martin" <guy.martin@oasis-open.org>, "Claudia Rauch" <claudia.rauch@oasis-open.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Agenda for next Advisory Council meeting, Monday, 27 September, 11 am EST, 5 pm CEST, 4 pm BST
Date: Fri, Sep 24, 2021 11:41 AM
Â
Hello all. Looking forward to your feedback. Obviously we're happy to hear thoughts on Monday, but we're merely kicking off the consultation there. Public or private thoughts by email also welcome. For people who dislike 4 page ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart

This Message Is From an External Sender

This message came from outside your organization.

ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd

Hello all. Looking forward to your feedback. Obviously we're happy to hear thoughts on Monday, but we're merely kicking off the consultation there. Public or private thoughts by email also welcome.Â

Â

For people who dislike 4 page documents, here's the TL;DR version:

Â

 1. Should we add more FOSS licenses to our Open Projects? Which ones? CLDA? AGPL? Does the license's source matter? Does their status within OSI matter?

 2. Within our menu of permitted licenses, we're pretty hands-off about telling projects what licenses to use. Projects could get caught in their own webs of multiple-license conflicts. How well do we think this "moderated chaos" approach to license selection works?Â

 3. We believe we'd be unable to submit GPL'd work to some entities, likely including ISO and some government procurement processes, due to their own requirements. But how will CC-0 public domain licensing go over? You may remember we chatted about CC-0 when we added it 18 months ago.* It's being used in some of our work.  As it matures, any further thoughts about applying CC-0 to technical content?

 4. Do we need to simplify our OASIS CLAs? Or to differentiate more between individual contributors, vs entities who have their employees contribute, vs repo maintainers/ committers? Ours** currently look a lot like the 2017 Apache model.Â

Â

cordially Jamie

Â

*Â https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/op-advisory-council/202001/maillist.htmlÂ

** https://www.oasis-open.org/open-projects/cla/oasis-open-projects-individual-contributor-license-agreement-i-cla/ -and- https://www.oasis-open.org/open-projects/cla/entity-cla-20210630/

Â

James Bryce Clark

General Counsel

OASIS Open

Â

	jamie.clark@oasis-open.org
	Xing  LinkedIn  Twitter
	Setting the standard for open collaboration.Â

Â

On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 9:13 AM Claudia Rauch <claudia.rauch@oasis-open.org> wrote:

Â

Hi everyone,

Â

Here's the agenda for our meeting on Monday. We have two main topics we'd like to hear your ideas and feedback on.

Â

1) Consultation on Emerging IP issues and practices in Open Projects (Guest: Jamie Clark of OASIS)

2) Brief update on establishing the OASIS Open Strategy Working Group

Â

Please let me know if there is any other topic you'd like to suggest for this meeting.

Â

And just in case, here's the Zoom link for the meeting: https://zoom.us/j/4071484044?pwd=RHAwaXhiNWo3OW1YUkZZUlE2c2JQdz09

Â

Very much looking forward to talking to you all on Monday,

Claudia

Â

--

DeborahÂBryant

Senior Director Open Source Program Office

Office of The CTO

Red Hat

dbryant@redhat.com ÂÂT:Â650.254.4033ââ ÂÂIM:Â@debbryant

@redhatopen