RE: [spectools] IPR statements and OASIS specs

["Karl F. Best" <karl.best@oasis-open.org>]

Works for me.

</karl>
=================================================================
Karl F. Best
OASIS - Director, Technical Operations
+1 978.667.5115 x206
karl.best@oasis-open.org  http://www.oasis-open.org


> -----Original Message-----
> From: eduardo@jurassic.eng.sun.com
> [mailto:eduardo@jurassic.eng.sun.com]On Behalf Of Eduardo Gutentag
> Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 6:37 PM
> To: Karl F. Best
> Cc: spectools@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re: [spectools] IPR statements and OASIS specs
>
>
>
> This kind of boilerplate (BTW, I agree wholeheartedly that
> there should
> be boilerplate in the status section) creates two classes of specs,
> those that carry the boilerplate because it's true that one or more
> patents have been disclosed, and those that don't carry the
> boilerplate.
> Which class to choose may be subject to human error; further, one that
> belongs to the second may have to change suddenly to the first, even
> during voting freeze...I therefore propose that the boilerplate be
> similar to the second one that Eve proposed, with a couple of
> modifications:
>
> "For information on wether any patents have been disclosed
> that may be
> essential to implementing this specification, and any offers
> of patent
> licensing terms, please refer to the Intellectual Property
> Rights section
> of the xxxTC web page (http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/xxxTC)"
>
> This boilerplate would of course be mandatory, not optional.
>
>
> "Karl F. Best" wrote:
> >
> > Eve:
> >
> > I agree that the IP statement should stay on the web page,
> but a pointer
> > should be in the spec document. Your suggestion is just
> about right for
> > length and content, but since this is a template we could
> make it more
> > generic:
> >
> > "One or more patents or other claims of intellectual property rights
> > have been disclosed whose use may be essential to implementing this
> > specification. See the Intellectual Property Rights section of the
> > Technical Committee's web page for disclosure of these
> patents and any
> > offers of patent licensing terms."
> >
> > This would be an optional statement of course, as not all specs will
> > have IP claims.
> >
> > </karl>
> > =================================================================
> > Karl F. Best
> > OASIS - Director, Technical Operations
> > +1 978.667.5115 x206
> > karl.best@oasis-open.org  http://www.oasis-open.org
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Eve L. Maler [mailto:eve.maler@sun.com]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 7:00 PM
> > > To: spectools@lists.oasis-open.org
> > > Subject: [spectools] IPR statements and OASIS specs
> > >
> > >
> > > I'm just trying to figure out how to alert readers of the
> SAML specs
> > > about the patents that have been disclosed on SAML.  What do
> > > you folks
> > > think of the following suggestions for boilerplate text?
> If you like
> > > them, Norm and I could put this in the sample docs...
> > >
> > >       Eve
> > >
> > > -------- Original Message --------
> > > Subject: Re: [security-services] RSA Security IPR statement
> > > Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 18:56:25 -0400
> > > From: "Eve L. Maler" <eve.maler@sun.com>
> > > To: "Philpott, Robert" <rphilpott@rsasecurity.com>
> > >
> > > Philpott, Robert wrote:
> > > ...
> > >  > Would it be cleaner to just stick it in
> > >  > an appendix of each document?
> > >  >
> > >  > Just a thought... In case you haven't already done this,
> > > perhaps an
> > > appendix
> > >  > for IPR statements should be in the OASIS template you
> > > built. I'd hate to
> > >  > clutter up the documents with full IPR letters from any
> > > and all companies
> > >  > with IP - fortunately SAML's just got this one.  The best
> > > solution in my
> > >  > mind would be to have a brief, standard boilerplate
> > > statement approved by
> > >  > OASIS in the appendix and reference back to the
> > > appropriate committee web
> > >  > page at the OASIS site.  Is this what OASIS is thinking
> > > also or are they
> > >  > sticking in the entire statement from the company?
> > >
> > > I don't know if they had really gotten that far in their
> thinking.  I
> > > think it's probably not a good idea to put the actual text of the
> > > letter/statement in the spec, for more than just space
> reasons.  For
> > > example, RSAS changed its text once already, and it's
> free to do so
> > > again.  Also, new statements might be made by other
> companies later,
> > > even after SAML becomes an OASIS Standard.  So it's
> probably best to
> > > have standard boilerplate, as you say, with a link.
> > >
> > > The next question is where to put the boilerplate.  There are two
> > > obvious possibilities: an appendix and the Status on the
> > > title page.  If
> > > the boilerplate is fairly modest in size, I think the Status
> > > section is
> > > best, since IPR concerns can materially affect the status of a
> > > specification.  Here is the kind of text I can see putting in:
> > >
> > >     "One or more patents have been disclosed whose use may be
> > > essential
> > > to implementing this specification. See the Intellectual
> > > Property Rights
> > > section of the Security Services web page
> > > (http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/security) for
> > > disclosure of these
> > > patents and any offers of patent licensing terms."
> > >
> > > Oh, and in the case of specs for which no patents have
> been disclosed
> > > yet, there should perhaps still be something like this:
> > >
> > >     "See the Intellectual Property Rights section of the xxx
> > > TC web page
> > > (http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/xxxTC) for
> information on the
> > > disclosure of any patents that may be essential to
> implementing this
> > > specification and any offers of patent licensing terms."
> > >
> > > This seems small enough for the Status section.  What do
> you think?
> > >
> > > (By the way, I note that the first paragraph in the
> Notices appendix
> > > talks about getting IPR information, but it's too general and too
> > > boilerplate-ish to really convey much to the casual reader...)
> > >
> > >       Eve
> > >
> > > --
> > > Eve Maler                                    +1 781 442 3190
> > > Sun Microsystems XML Technology Center   eve.maler @ sun.com
> > >
> > >
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> > > manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
> > >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> > manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
>
> --
> Eduardo Gutentag               |         e-mail:
> eduardo.gutentag@Sun.COM
> XML Technology Center          |         Phone:  (510) 986-3651
> Sun Microsystems Inc.          |
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
>