[Members] Patents and Copyright in XEPs
winfried at tilanus.com
Thu Jan 16 17:29:23 UTC 2014
On 16-01-14 16:22, Kurt Zeilenga wrote:
Thanks for your additions. I was writing a long answer, but better keep
it to the summary:
> Well, the only reason I see to change to explicit license grant
> instead of a copyright assignment is that our copyright assessment
> practice, IMO, is that what we're effectively doing is license grant
> not copyright assignment in that we have no writings... and hence
> we're rely on implicit license grants.
Your point is totally correct, our current practice of transferring
copyright is highly disputable. So currently we rely on implicit license
grants. Explicitly requesting an irrevocable license that allows
modification and sublicensing would be enough.
> Here I'd follow IETF rules for patent disclosures and consideration
> of those disclosures as part of the standards process.
> They have working code, we should use it! We're unlikely to develop
> independently a better working code here.
More information about the Members