RE: [xslt-conformance] RE: IPR policy question

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

I agree that you've made some good points, but not that your suggestions
comply with the current policy. I don't want to make any "band-aid"
fixes to the IPR policy right now as we'll be doing major surgery on it
soon. Some time in the near future the OASIS Board (and legal counsel)
will be revisiting our IPR policy. I will add this to the list of issues
for that review, but in the mean time we should just leave it as is.

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


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lofton Henderson [mailto:lofton@rockynet.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2001 10:20 AM
> To: Karl F. Best
> Cc: xslt-conformance@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re: [xslt-conformance] RE: IPR policy question
>
>
> At 08:19 AM 11/21/2001 -0500, Karl F. Best wrote:
> >[...]
> >I don't agree.
>
> Okay, we disagree.
>
> Will you nevertheless ask Legal whether a referencing
> mechanism is acceptable?
>
>
> >In the first place, the OASIS IPR policy states in IPR.4(A)
> that "OASIS
> >specifications shall include the following notice:" and in
> IPR.4(C) that
> >"The following copyright notice and disclaimer shall be
> included in all
> >OASIS specification-related documentation:" In other words, the
> >statements must be included, not simply referred to.
>
> If Legal agrees with this, then I suggest that OASIS IPR
> policy needs an
> overhaul.
>
>
> >My second objection is that hyperlinks only work in electronic form.
>
> Hyperlinks are one of the two alternatives that I suggested.
>
> >They don't work on paper, so once a person prints out the
> specification
> >on paper the effective copyright language is lost. And even
> >electronically it's not foolproof: note that I replied to your email
> >using plain text (rather than HTML), and the hyperlinks in the W3C
> >snippet are now lost.
>
> On the other hand, the first thing I did with the 6-line XML
> file on my
> local system was to cut out the 32-line statement embedded in
> its middle,
> so that I could see the beginning and the end of the file on
> the same screen.
>
> >So as long as everyone refers to the web page, and
> >only the web page, for the spec the copyright statement is
> safe, but as
> >soon as it begins to be disseminated further it will be lost.
>
> I don't get your point.  It is only lost if one cuts the abbreviated
> statement that I proposed.  Same as if one cuts the 32-line chunk.
>
> Active hyperlinks are one of two options I suggested.  The other was
> reference to a location where the complete text could be
> found. Go back and
> check the words of my original suggestion -- I'm pretty sure
> that the brief
> statement legally binds the user to the contents of the terms at the
> referenced location.
>
> I believe that an unambiguous and resolvable reference to a
> license gives
> adequate legal protection, whether it is accessed by clicking
> a hyperlink
> on a piece of text or by some other means (typing a URL in 'location'
> window of a browser, or by sending a fax to OASIS and
> requesting a copy, or
> ...).
>
> If these assertions are not true, then W3C has a real problem
> -- thousands
> of documents are unprotected.  (I have worked directly with
> their legal
> team -- setting up SVG test suite IPR mechanisms -- and doubt
> that they
> have made a blunder of this magnitude!)
>
> By the way, a variation on the abbreviated-reference proposal
> is to include
> a copy of the license/copyright statement in a file in distributed
> packages.   This has been done, in both standards and
> commercial venues in
> which I have worked.
>
> Bottom line -- some TC people think that this is an onerous
> requirement,
> and looking around at other venues suggests that it need not
> be so.  So why
> not try to streamline things and make life easier for the TCs?
>
> -Lofton.
>
>
> ></karl>
> >=================================================================
> >Karl F. Best
> >OASIS - Director, Technical Operations
> >978.667.5115 x206
> >karl.best@oasis-open.org  http://www.oasis-open.org
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Lofton Henderson [mailto:lofton@rockynet.com]
> >Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 5:40 PM
> >To: Karl F. Best
> >Subject: IPR policy question
> >
> >Karl,
> >
> >I have an action item for XSLT TC.  Could you please give me
> a reading
> >on this from OASIS Legal?
> >
> >Here's the problem.  A literal interpretation of the OASIS IPR policy
> >has us thinking that we have to include a certain hefty
> chunk of text,
> >OASIS.IPR.4.(C), in every XSLT TC document.  In our pending public
> >release, amongst the many files is a 6-line XML file.  The
> result of the
> >policy is 32 lines of useless boiler plate legalese
> overwhelming the 6
> >lines of content.
> >
> >There is consensus that it is silly (absurd!) to have full text of a
> >32-line IPR policy in a 6-line XML file.
> >
> >Particularly since we think that it need not be so.  Compare to W3C
> >practice:
> >
> >"Copyright ©1998, 1999, 2000, 2001 W3C® (MIT, INRIA, Keio),
> All Rights
> >Reserved. W3C liability, trademark, document use and
> software licensing
> >rules apply.",
> >
> >which appears in every W3C standard (and that's *all* that appears in
> >almost every standard).  Each of the words Copyright,
> liability, ... is
> >a hyperlink to the appropriate document.  In a format where one can't
> >attach hyperlinks, e.g., in the XSLT TC's XML files, DTDs,
> etc, then an
> >expression such as the following should work (it has worked fine in
> >other venues of my experience):
> >
> >"Copyright (C) The Organization for the Advancement of Structured
> >Information Standards [OASIS] (2001). All Rights Reserved.
> Copyright,
> >liability, trademark, document use, and software licensing
> as defined in
> >http://www.oasis-open.org/who/intellectualproperty.shtml
> apply."  (The
> >URL could point more specifically at a named anchor at 4(C), if
> >desired.)
> >
> >Simple question for Legal.  Can we use this abbreviated approach for
> >XSLT TC documents?
> >
> >I understand that there is some interest in a broad review
> of OASIS IPR.
> >If possible, could we please avoid broader issues than this limited
> >question, as XSLT TC intends to publish soon.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >-Lofton.
> >
> >
> >----------------------------------------------------------------
> >To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> >manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
>
>
> *******************
> Lofton Henderson
> 1919 Fourteenth St., #604
> Boulder, CO   80302
>
> Phone:  303-449-8728
> Email:  lofton@rockynet.com
> *******************
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
>