incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Craig L Russell <Craig.Russ...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: Incubator Proposal: SPL
Date Mon, 17 Sep 2007 17:53:21 GMT
Hi Mark,

Thanks for that. I also found other documents on the site [1] to be  
relevant, in particular the cover page of [2].

I have no further issues with the IP aspect of this proposal, and  
suggest that references to [1] and [2] and [3] be included in the  
updated proposal to head off future rat-holes.

Regards,

Craig
[1] http://www.dmtf.org/about/policies
[2] http://www.dmtf.org/standards/published_documents/DSP4004.pdf
[3] http://www.dmtf.org/about/policies/patent-10-18-01.pdf

On Sep 17, 2007, at 10:30 AM, Mark A. Carlson wrote:

> The DMTF patent policy is here:
>
> http://www.dmtf.org/about/policies/patent-10-18-01.pdf
>
> The DMTF does not have any IP in any of its specs and
> unless DMTF is explicitly notified of such, neither do any of
> the members.
>
> -- mark
>
> Craig L Russell wrote:
>> Hi David,
>>
>> Thanks for the clarifications.
>>
>> On Sep 17, 2007, at 5:57 AM, David L Kaminsky wrote:
>>
>>> On the standard itself, not surprisingly, the DMTF encourages
>>> implementations, and at submission, the DMTF requires this text:
>>>
>>> "Permission to copy, display, perform, modify and distribute the
>>> specification, and to authorize others to do the foregoing, in  
>>> any medium
>>> without fee or royalty is hereby granted for the purpose of  
>>> developing and
>>> evaluating the Specification.
>>
>> But the intended use here is not "developing and evaluating" the  
>> Specification, but implementing it. Is there a grant of license  
>> for implementations?
>>
>>> The Specification may be published as one or
>>> more separate documents including for example as ASCII formats,  
>>> schema or
>>> metadata files rather than solely as a single document.
>>>
>>> "Co-Developers agree to grant a license to third parties, under
>>> royalty-free and otherwise reasonable, non-discriminatory terms and
>>> conditions, to their respective Essential Patent Rights (as that  
>>> term is
>>> defined in the DMTF Patent and Technology Policy) that are  
>>> necessary to
>>> implement the Specification in accordance with the DMTF Patent and
>>> Technology Policy."
>>
>> This required grant of patent rights is a good indicator that  
>> implementing the Specification doesn't get Apache into potential  
>> trouble, but I'd still like to see an explicit statement regarding  
>> the rights of independent implementations to use the IP contained  
>> in the Specification itself.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Craig
>>
>> Craig Russell
>> DB PMC, OpenJPA PMC
>> clr@apache.org http://db.apache.org/jdo
>>
>>

Craig Russell
DB PMC, OpenJPA PMC
clr@apache.org http://db.apache.org/jdo



Mime
View raw message