RE: [security-services] Question regarding namespace rules

["Cantor, Scott" <cantor.2@osu.edu>]

> In this case, having a substantial deployed base under the existing
> namespace certainly makes a reasonable argument for leaving it as is.

Thank you, I appreciate you weighing in (though it's probably going to cost me more work ;-)

> I assume this would cause no IPR violations, correct? It wouldn't be impinging
> on their copyrights or anything like that, right? Mucking up IPR is the only
> reason I could see for not doing this.

It would depend on whether licensing the IPR is sufficient (which I believe is exactly how the TCs operate in general), vs. actually transferring ownership. I know the OASIS specs all tend to say (c) OASIS, and I don't know in practice how that is achieved or has been in the past since it's very hard in practice to actually grant copyright vs. just the right to reuse. I have to refresh my memory on all that stuff, it's been a while.

The copyright in this case is quite clear, it's owned by my university, and subsequently was licensed under Apache 2.0 (and the sublicensee could be persuaded to do something official with it). Getting more than that out of Ohio State would probably be possible but difficult, due to red tape, not any actual sense of ownership.

Anyway, knowing it *could* be done is sufficient to make it worth some legwork on the mechanics for me.

-- Scott