rights-requirements message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Elist Home]
Subject: [rights-requirements] need clarification of OASIS IP policies
- From: Bob Glushko <glushko@SIMS.Berkeley.EDU>
- To: karl.best@oasis-open.org
- Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2002 15:42:25 -0700
Karl,
Today a highly-contentious issue arose in our Rights
Requirement subcommittee and it would be helpful to get an unambiguous
answer from OASIS about the IP policy. Content Guard contributed
XrML as a starting point, and at the same time disclosed that it
was governed by several patents, but also stated its intent to license
the patents under RAND terms (not yet spelled out). No one doubts
that Content Guard has complied with the OASIS procedures for IP
disclosure. The dispute is whether this disclosure binds the TC in
any way in determining requirements for an OASIS Rights Expression
Language.
Some people assume that this contribution and
disclosure implies that any work product of the TC is bound by Content
Guard's intent, while other people have said that nothing prevents the TC
from issuing a spec that is implementable on a royalty-free basis.
Clearly the TC can't tell Content Guard what terms it must offer, but is
the TC at liberty to decide what kind of terms it wants its spec to have
and to see if Content Guard will accommodate them?
We need an official answer ASAP. We don't have
time to debate this inside the TC when the answer lies with
OASIS.
Thanks
Bob Glushko
--
Robert J. Glushko, Ph.D.
http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/~glushko
School of Information Management & Systems
102 South Hall
University of California, Berkeley CA 94720-4600
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC