OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

ws-brsp message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: licensing aspect of test tool code


Although the editorial aspect of profile specifications will be the main topic of our call tomorrow, and we got statements from contributors that they are willing to donate their code, we’ll need to add a point on the IPR/licensing in our agenda – I’ll try to invite OASIS legal staff to speak on this.

Indeed the licensing aspect of test tool code is not resolved yet - sorry I should have been more specific about the need to clarify licensing conditions of these donations.

But it seems we should instead delegate the licensing /IPR issue to the WS-I steering committee (SC) in OASIS – see below. So concretely we may want to engage the  WS-I SC to initiate and decide the right licensing and status for test tools, which would in turn engage OASIS staff & board for acting on this.

See below a summary of former exchanges with OASIS staff on this:


OASIS  position and options :

* OASIS is the successor owner of the WS-I specifications,

profiles and software.  That's not the same thing as saying OASIS

holds all rights in the underlying IPR contributed into those



* OASIS, could serve as custodian and  archivist of the material,

but OASIS would not be able to acquire retroactive rights to create new licenses in it.


* suggestion from Jamie C.: Given there is a significantly overlap between

WS-I OASIS member section and old WS-I contributors & Board, the OASIS staff could ask

OASIS Board upon the recommendation of the MS StC, to permit us to donate the code

into either the public domain or (probably better for integrity control)

a Creative-Commons-type open license maintaining some kind of attribution pointers.


From OASIS standpoint, that recommendation would make sense, so long as

(a) we use terms that appropriately shield OASIS from liability,

(b) OASIS takes no position as to the claims of others, and

(c) we first announce our intent, share it with the likely community

of historic WS-I contributors, and receive no objections.



On which OSS license:  it has to be something that majorities of the community and our Board all will tolerate. 

e.g. BSD could work, but it's the community who has to decide this.



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]