Re: [security-services] Liberty IPR Issues (was: Liberty ID-FF 1. 2 submissionto the SSTC)

["Conor P. Cahill" <concahill@aol.com>]

Anthony Nadalin wrote on 12/3/2003, 8:52 AM:
 >
 > Its pretty clear, in "Each Author grants permission to OASIS and OASIS
 > members the right to copy, display, perform, modify and distribute the
 > Web
 > Services Security ("WS-Security") draft specification and to authorize
 > others to do the foregoing, in any medium without fee or royalty, for the
 > purpose of further developing the WS-Security specification in the
 > WSSTC as
 > set forth in the draft WSS TC charter".

Note that that statement only applies for the "purpose of further 
developing the specification."   It does not apply for any other purpose.

 > hmmm, you seem to be pointing out issues but you have no problem ?

The issues I am pointing out are the issues that you claim to be 
unacceptable in the Liberty contribution exist in other groups that you 
found perfectly acceptable.

 > We are not asking for more stringent IPR disclosures in this
 > venue we are trying to understand and clarify the IPR statements
 > made here

Yes you are.  You are asking for the Liberty folks grant IPR rights to 
derivative implementations because the current grant is just for an 
implementation of Liberty and SAML may do things differently.

That is a much more stringent requirement being placed on the Liberty 
contributions than has been placed on other examples as I described.

Conor