[Members] Patents and Copyright in XEPs

Dave Cridland 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:
>
> Hi,
>
> > 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...
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/members/attachments/20140116/ecc6fdf7/attachment.html>


More information about the Members mailing list