[Members] Patents and Copyright in XEPs
dave at cridland.net
Thu Jan 16 17:41:20 UTC 2014
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 5:36 PM, Winfried Tilanus <winfried at tilanus.com>wrote:
> On 16-01-14 16:29, Kurt Zeilenga wrote:
> > and one note more specifically about patents...
> > good luck getting any large firm to assign needed patents to the XSF.
> I hoped to make clear that this practice is a dead end indeed, by
> pointing out that only patent attorneys would get rich from implicitly
> assigning patents to the XSF.
> But still we have to decide if we want a royalty free general license or
> use patent licensing to protect the interests of the XSF (and make life
> of others more difficult.)
There's essentially four cases:
1) No patents impact a XEP.
We can cope with this one fine, of course.
2) A contributor/participant owns (or represents the owner of) a patent.
Here, we could require disclosure or licensing.
3) A contributor/participant is aware of a third party patent.
Here, we can only require disclosure.
4) A third-party patent exists which is unknown to any participant.
In this instance, we're stuffed whichever way.
The IETF goes for disclosure; the intent is that other participants can
take a view on it during the standards process if possible.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Members