wsbpel-implement message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Use of contributed IPR in conducting tests of partial and draft specifications
- From: James Bryce Clark <jamie.clark@oasis-open.org>
- To: wsbpel-implement@lists.oasis-open.org
- Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 08:55:14 -0800
This follows up on my 10 November message to this
list, and the conversation we had at the last wsbpel-implementation
subcommittee meeting regarding the possible need for licenses in
connection with "testbed" plugfests prior to a specification's
approval. Several members asked whether the OASIS IPR policy
applies equally to, or works differently for, interim interoperability
tests conducted as an official but informal TC activity.
Please note that each OASIS member is responsible for
their own compliance with, and interpretations of, our rules, so we
cannot provide advice that replaces your need to consult with your own
experts. The definitive answers to these questions can be found
only in the text of our posted rules. In case it's helpful, though,
here is my understanding of the pertinent general issues.
Our current policy does not distinguish between
'testbed' implementations and other uses of IP contributed to an OASIS
Technical Committee. As a result, the usual rules apply, e.g.,
-- Members may have claims against the work
being incorporated into a specification, and are encouraged to disclose
them, in which case those disclosures are posted to the TC's IPR notices
page.
-- Contributors are encouraged to offer licenses
permitting the use of those contributions, but are permitted to set their
own "reasonable and nondiscriminatory" conditions and
restrictions (which also are posted to that notice page).
-- Users must evaluate the license offers that are
made, and satisfy themselves that they have acquired sufficient
permission for their planned implementation or derivation. Those
determinations are to be made by each user.
I note that the majority of WSBPEL TC contributors
already have provided names and contact information for licensing
permission, in their postings to the TC's IPR notices page
(www.oasis-open.org/committees/wsbel/ipr.php).
I'd assume that they would be willing to provide adequate assurances for
testing activities they support. I suggest that prospective test
participants contact them, if concerned about a licensing gap for
permission to build a test client. At this stage, as I read it,
they're free to provide licenses or not, and members are free to decide
whether to participate or not. Of course, those decisions may
affect adoption of the work.
OASIS TC members are free to express their opinions
about whether any given work has sufficiently broad and available
licensure to permit widespread implementation. Any member may
choose to adopt a position regarding any of our standards or drafts, or
any element of them, including voting against it, or conditioning its
support on satisfactory license availability. (And it does
happen; I was involved in some of those issues when I was a TC
participant myself, before joining the OASIS staff.) OASIS'
role is to provide an open forum for this, and to encourage communication
about wider availability. Ultimately, though, the "market
demand" for adequately-available IPR terms comes from developers
and users, and is expressed by their decisions to accept or reject
conditions, and to adopt or decline to use the work.
Our industry is in transition. Complex patent
and competition issues affect standards development with an intensity
that did not exist five years ago. Purely as a personal
observation, I think we're in an experimental phase, and it's still
too early to judge how readily developers and end-users will adopt
standards that embed substantial license restrictions. We should
learn much about this in the next year. I can't dismiss the
possibility that some continuing license conditions will be
acceptable. Look at SOAP, a success by anyone's measure, but the
subject of multiple proprietary claims through most of its
development. The positions that OASIS members take regarding what
kinds of licenses are appropriate, or necessary, are essential input into
this important, developing issue.
Regards Jamie
~ James Bryce Clark
~ Manager Tech Stds Dev, OASIS
~ +1 978 667 5115 x 203 central office
~ +1 310 293 6739 direct
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]