www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Davanum Srinivas <dava...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Derby/Cloudscape Patent
Date Thu, 23 Jun 2005 02:56:36 GMT
Why should we hold Verisign to one standard (for TSIK, Justin told me
that we should get an explicit grant) and one for IBM? Why not get an
explicit grant (or) at least an acknowledgement that this patent is in
"play". This is one thing i dug up. We don't know if there are others.
Stefano specifically asked for this information (which patents are
implicitly granted) on the board@ mailing list. I posted specific
question about this patent once on board@ and once on pmc@incubator
and got no responses from any one. Finally i asked Sam on IM and he
asked me to send Jeff a note.

<rant ignore="on">
On a related note, i have spent a lot of time searching for the IBM
patents for WS-Security and still haven't found it. It's ridiculous
for Apache to have to sign a license agreement for OASIS WS-Security
specification (see http://www.ibm.com/ibm/licensing/977Q/2112.shtml)
when there is *NO* public information either or IBM site or MSFT site
or Verisign site about which patents they have that Apache will
infringe by implementing WS-Security. Even the license PDF does not
mention any specific patents. This is just driving me nuts. At least
verisign is willing to donate code (TSIK) and would consider granting
licenses for their IP. Am getting the run around from IBM and MSFT
folks on the OASIS WSS mailing list (some public/some private). For
godsakes, they threw me out of the mailing list on a technicality.
</rant>

thanks for listening,
dims

On 6/22/05, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geirm@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> On Jun 22, 2005, at 10:21 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> 
> > Jeff,
> >
> > Is U.S. Patent 6,304,882
> > (http://www.google.com/search?q=Patent+6%2C304%2C882) applicable to
> > Derby as it was originally from cloudscape? See following URL's for
> > more information on the transfer details etc. If so, can we please get
> > an explicit patent grant?
> 
> I read it as being owned by IBM.  If that's so, and IBM contributed
> the code, why do we need an *explicit* grant?
> 
> Just curious about the thinking here...
> 
> geir
> 
> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/cjjhh
> > http://tinyurl.com/99hxh
> > http://tinyurl.com/7vomw
> >
> > Thanks,
> > dims
> >
> > --
> > Davanum Srinivas -http://blogs.cocoondev.org/dims/
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
> > only, are not privileged and do not constitute legal advice.
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
> >
> >
> 
> --
> Geir Magnusson Jr                                  +1-203-665-6437
> geirm@apache.org
> 
> 
> 


-- 
Davanum Srinivas -http://blogs.cocoondev.org/dims/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only, are not privileged and do not constitute legal advice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org


Mime
View raw message