Technical Advisory Board (TAB)

Greetings! After sleeping on the IP flow diagram it occurred to me that I omitted the copyright on OASIS text and the OASIS trademark references under the traditional OASIS TC IPR modes. Those are governed separately from IPR, the focus of this diagram, hence the oversight. Question: Is that too obvious to need mentioning separately on the far left under OASIS IPR Policy, which is a hyperlink to the four traditional modes? OASIS copyright on work products appears to be defined by Section 14 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/ipr#notices . I say "appears to be" because there may be other provisions that govern as well and I have not made an exhaustive search. OASIS trademark(s) appear to be defined by Section 5.3 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/ipr#s5.3 Taken as a whole, the OASIS IPR document covers patents, copyright and trademarks. From my reading of the various other license choices, I see gaps in their coverage and/or possible undefined relationships, such as with OASIS copyright. I'm not suggesting any resolution or position with this diagram. It is an attempt to tease out issues others will have to resolve. BTW, blame Chet for this graphic as he requested I put my mis-understanding of the process into graphical form. ;-) Hope everyone is having a great week! Patrick -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau Attachment: signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

I like the diagram & I'm going to share it with the staff. It is a very simple graphic that would have eliminated a lot of head scratching had we put it this way earlier.  Not sure about copyright and trademark on the OASIS side but it probably wouldn't hurt to incorporate it somehow.  The other change that might be useful would be to color code the blocks and arrows in some way to show when the licensing locks in. Basically, TC and Committee draft would be a different color since the license terms aren't locked in until CS.  But let's see what people think first.  /chet On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Greetings! After sleeping on the IP flow diagram it occurred to me that I omitted the copyright on OASIS text and the OASIS trademark references under the traditional OASIS TC IPR modes. Those are governed separately from IPR, the focus of this diagram, hence the oversight. Question: Is that too obvious to need mentioning separately on the far left under OASIS IPR Policy, which is a hyperlink to the four traditional modes? OASIS copyright on work products appears to be defined by Section 14 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/ policies-guidelines/ipr# notices . I say "appears to be" because there may be other provisions that govern as well and I have not made an exhaustive search. OASIS trademark(s) appear to be defined by Section 5.3 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/ policies-guidelines/ipr#s5.3 Taken as a whole, the OASIS IPR document covers patents, copyright and trademarks. From my reading of the various other license choices, I see gaps in their coverage and/or possible undefined relationships, such as with OASIS copyright. I'm not suggesting any resolution or position with this diagram. It is an attempt to tease out issues others will have to resolve. BTW, blame Chet for this graphic as he requested I put my mis-understanding of the process into graphical form. ;-) Hope everyone is having a great week! Patrick -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393 

Chet, Thanks! One comment/question below: On 02/24/2017 11:12 AM, Chet Ensign wrote: I like the diagram & I'm going to share it with the staff. It is a very simple graphic that would have eliminated a lot of head scratching had we put it this way earlier.  Not sure about copyright and trademark on the OASIS side but it probably wouldn't hurt to incorporate it somehow.  The other change that might be useful would be to color code the blocks and arrows in some way to show when the licensing locks in. Basically, TC and Committee draft would be a different color since the license terms aren't locked in until CS.  Err, depends on what you mean by lock. I though once a TC chooses an IPR mode, that can't be changed. Yes? Or No? From the IPR Guidelines: A TC may not change its IPR Mode without closing and submitting a new charter. While it is true that patent obligations vest/bind/etc/ at CS, that's not the same as the IPR of the TC. Yes? Perhaps the IPR mode binds from the outset but the scope of the patent rights (and by implication your contribution to it) is set at the issuance of a CS. If anyone thinks that is a helpful distinction, color might be a way to indicate that but may be too subtle for the purpose of this diagram. Could have another diagram that has more details, the copyright, patents and trademark broken out for each one. Hope you are having a great day! Patrick But let's see what people think first.  /chet On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Greetings! After sleeping on the IP flow diagram it occurred to me that I omitted the copyright on OASIS text and the OASIS trademark references under the traditional OASIS TC IPR modes. Those are governed separately from IPR, the focus of this diagram, hence the oversight. Question: Is that too obvious to need mentioning separately on the far left under OASIS IPR Policy, which is a hyperlink to the four traditional modes? OASIS copyright on work products appears to be defined by Section 14 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/ policies-guidelines/ipr# notices . I say appears to be because there may be other provisions that govern as well and I have not made an exhaustive search. OASIS trademark(s) appear to be defined by Section 5.3 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/ policies-guidelines/ipr#s5.3 Taken as a whole, the OASIS IPR document covers patents, copyright and trademarks. From my reading of the various other license choices, I see gaps in their coverage and/or possible undefined relationships, such as with OASIS copyright. I'm not suggesting any resolution or position with this diagram. It is an attempt to tease out issues others will have to resolve. BTW, blame Chet for this graphic as he requested I put my mis-understanding of the process into graphical form. ;-) Hope everyone is having a great week! Patrick -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393  -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau Attachment: signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

You are correct. The TC is committed to the IPR mode from the start. I was thinking about when the license locks in for the work. In an open project, the license applies from the moment someone submits something to the project. On the TC Process, the IPR mode applies in a limited way for TC members during development. Then, once the CSD is approved as a Committee Specification, the IPR obligations lock in and apply to any conforming implementation.  On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Chet, Thanks! One comment/question below: On 02/24/2017 11:12 AM, Chet Ensign wrote: I like the diagram & I'm going to share it with the staff. It is a very simple graphic that would have eliminated a lot of head scratching had we put it this way earlier.  Not sure about copyright and trademark on the OASIS side but it probably wouldn't hurt to incorporate it somehow.  The other change that might be useful would be to color code the blocks and arrows in some way to show when the licensing locks in. Basically, TC and Committee draft would be a different color since the license terms aren't locked in until CS.  Err, depends on what you mean by "lock." I though once a TC chooses an IPR mode, that can't be changed. Yes? Or No? From the IPR Guidelines: "A TC may not change its IPR Mode without closing and submitting a new charter." While it is true that patent obligations "vest/bind/etc/" at CS, that's not the same as the IPR of the TC. Yes? Perhaps the IPR mode binds from the outset but the scope of the patent rights (and by implication your contribution to it) is set at the issuance of a CS. If anyone thinks that is a helpful distinction, color might be a way to indicate that but may be too subtle for the purpose of this diagram. Could have another diagram that has more details, the copyright, patents and trademark broken out for each one. Hope you are having a great day! Patrick But let's see what people think first.  /chet On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Greetings! After sleeping on the IP flow diagram it occurred to me that I omitted the copyright on OASIS text and the OASIS trademark references under the traditional OASIS TC IPR modes. Those are governed separately from IPR, the focus of this diagram, hence the oversight. Question: Is that too obvious to need mentioning separately on the far left under OASIS IPR Policy, which is a hyperlink to the four traditional modes? OASIS copyright on work products appears to be defined by Section 14 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/pol icies-guidelines/ipr#notices . I say "appears to be" because there may be other provisions that govern as well and I have not made an exhaustive search. OASIS trademark(s) appear to be defined by Section 5.3 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/pol icies-guidelines/ipr#s5.3 Taken as a whole, the OASIS IPR document covers patents, copyright and trademarks. From my reading of the various other license choices, I see gaps in their coverage and/or possible undefined relationships, such as with OASIS copyright. I'm not suggesting any resolution or position with this diagram. It is an attempt to tease out issues others will have to resolve. BTW, blame Chet for this graphic as he requested I put my mis-understanding of the process into graphical form. ;-) Hope everyone is having a great week! Patrick -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393   -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393 

From the diagram it looks like you can change the  IPR terms after every step.  This is misleading. Perhaps eliminate the words in the arrows after the first stage. Ashok On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 10:36 AM Chet Ensign < chet.ensign@oasis-open.org > wrote: You are correct. The TC is committed to the IPR mode from the start. I was thinking about when the license locks in for the work. In an open project, the license applies from the moment someone submits something to the project. On the TC Process, the IPR mode applies in a limited way for TC members during development. Then, once the CSD is approved as a Committee Specification, the IPR obligations lock in and apply to any conforming implementation.  On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Chet, Thanks! One comment/question below: On 02/24/2017 11:12 AM, Chet Ensign wrote: I like the diagram & I'm going to share it with the staff. It is a very simple graphic that would have eliminated a lot of head scratching had we put it this way earlier.  Not sure about copyright and trademark on the OASIS side but it probably wouldn't hurt to incorporate it somehow.  The other change that might be useful would be to color code the blocks and arrows in some way to show when the licensing locks in. Basically, TC and Committee draft would be a different color since the license terms aren't locked in until CS.  Err, depends on what you mean by "lock." I though once a TC chooses an IPR mode, that can't be changed. Yes? Or No? From the IPR Guidelines: "A TC may not change its IPR Mode without closing and submitting a new charter." While it is true that patent obligations "vest/bind/etc/" at CS, that's not the same as the IPR of the TC. Yes? Perhaps the IPR mode binds from the outset but the scope of the patent rights (and by implication your contribution to it) is set at the issuance of a CS. If anyone thinks that is a helpful distinction, color might be a way to indicate that but may be too subtle for the purpose of this diagram. Could have another diagram that has more details, the copyright, patents and trademark broken out for each one. Hope you are having a great day! Patrick But let's see what people think first.  /chet On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Greetings! After sleeping on the IP flow diagram it occurred to me that I omitted the copyright on OASIS text and the OASIS trademark references under the traditional OASIS TC IPR modes. Those are governed separately from IPR, the focus of this diagram, hence the oversight. Question: Is that too obvious to need mentioning separately on the far left under OASIS IPR Policy, which is a hyperlink to the four traditional modes? OASIS copyright on work products appears to be defined by Section 14 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/ipr#notices . I say "appears to be" because there may be other provisions that govern as well and I have not made an exhaustive search. OASIS trademark(s) appear to be defined by Section 5.3 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/ipr#s5.3 Taken as a whole, the OASIS IPR document covers patents, copyright and trademarks. From my reading of the various other license choices, I see gaps in their coverage and/or possible undefined relationships, such as with OASIS copyright. I'm not suggesting any resolution or position with this diagram. It is an attempt to tease out issues others will have to resolve. BTW, blame Chet for this graphic as he requested I put my mis-understanding of the process into graphical form. ;-) Hope everyone is having a great week! Patrick -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393   -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393  -- All the best, Ashok

Good point.  On Feb 24, 2017 2:01 PM, "Ashok Malhotra" < malhotrasahib@gmail.com > wrote: From the diagram it looks like you can change the  IPR terms after every step.  This is misleading. Perhaps eliminate the words in the arrows after the first stage. Ashok On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 10:36 AM Chet Ensign < chet.ensign@oasis-open.org > wrote: You are correct. The TC is committed to the IPR mode from the start. I was thinking about when the license locks in for the work. In an open project, the license applies from the moment someone submits something to the project. On the TC Process, the IPR mode applies in a limited way for TC members during development. Then, once the CSD is approved as a Committee Specification, the IPR obligations lock in and apply to any conforming implementation.  On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Chet, Thanks! One comment/question below: On 02/24/2017 11:12 AM, Chet Ensign wrote: I like the diagram & I'm going to share it with the staff. It is a very simple graphic that would have eliminated a lot of head scratching had we put it this way earlier.  Not sure about copyright and trademark on the OASIS side but it probably wouldn't hurt to incorporate it somehow.  The other change that might be useful would be to color code the blocks and arrows in some way to show when the licensing locks in. Basically, TC and Committee draft would be a different color since the license terms aren't locked in until CS.  Err, depends on what you mean by "lock." I though once a TC chooses an IPR mode, that can't be changed. Yes? Or No? From the IPR Guidelines: "A TC may not change its IPR Mode without closing and submitting a new charter." While it is true that patent obligations "vest/bind/etc/" at CS, that's not the same as the IPR of the TC. Yes? Perhaps the IPR mode binds from the outset but the scope of the patent rights (and by implication your contribution to it) is set at the issuance of a CS. If anyone thinks that is a helpful distinction, color might be a way to indicate that but may be too subtle for the purpose of this diagram. Could have another diagram that has more details, the copyright, patents and trademark broken out for each one. Hope you are having a great day! Patrick But let's see what people think first.  /chet On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Greetings! After sleeping on the IP flow diagram it occurred to me that I omitted the copyright on OASIS text and the OASIS trademark references under the traditional OASIS TC IPR modes. Those are governed separately from IPR, the focus of this diagram, hence the oversight. Question: Is that too obvious to need mentioning separately on the far left under OASIS IPR Policy, which is a hyperlink to the four traditional modes? OASIS copyright on work products appears to be defined by Section 14 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/ policies-guidelines/ipr# notices . I say "appears to be" because there may be other provisions that govern as well and I have not made an exhaustive search. OASIS trademark(s) appear to be defined by Section 5.3 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/ policies-guidelines/ipr#s5.3 Taken as a whole, the OASIS IPR document covers patents, copyright and trademarks. From my reading of the various other license choices, I see gaps in their coverage and/or possible undefined relationships, such as with OASIS copyright. I'm not suggesting any resolution or position with this diagram. It is an attempt to tease out issues others will have to resolve. BTW, blame Chet for this graphic as he requested I put my mis-understanding of the process into graphical form. ;-) Hope everyone is having a great week! Patrick -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393   -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393   -- All the best, Ashok

Ashok, Good point. I was thinking it emphasizes the same model persists to the end. Perhaps eliminating the words after the first arrow and a comment that initial choices are irrevocable for the life of the TC or project? Thanks! Hope you are looking forward to a great weekend! Patrick On 02/24/2017 02:01 PM, Ashok Malhotra wrote: From the diagram it looks like you can change the  IPR terms after every step.  This is misleading. Perhaps eliminate the words in the arrows after the first stage. Ashok On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 10:36 AM Chet Ensign < chet.ensign@oasis-open.org > wrote: You are correct. The TC is committed to the IPR mode from the start. I was thinking about when the license locks in for the work. In an open project, the license applies from the moment someone submits something to the project. On the TC Process, the IPR mode applies in a limited way for TC members during development. Then, once the CSD is approved as a Committee Specification, the IPR obligations lock in and apply to any conforming implementation.  On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Chet, Thanks! One comment/question below: On 02/24/2017 11:12 AM, Chet Ensign wrote: I like the diagram & I'm going to share it with the staff. It is a very simple graphic that would have eliminated a lot of head scratching had we put it this way earlier.  Not sure about copyright and trademark on the OASIS side but it probably wouldn't hurt to incorporate it somehow.  The other change that might be useful would be to color code the blocks and arrows in some way to show when the licensing locks in. Basically, TC and Committee draft would be a different color since the license terms aren't locked in until CS.  Err, depends on what you mean by lock. I though once a TC chooses an IPR mode, that can't be changed. Yes? Or No? From the IPR Guidelines: A TC may not change its IPR Mode without closing and submitting a new charter. While it is true that patent obligations vest/bind/etc/ at CS, that's not the same as the IPR of the TC. Yes? Perhaps the IPR mode binds from the outset but the scope of the patent rights (and by implication your contribution to it) is set at the issuance of a CS. If anyone thinks that is a helpful distinction, color might be a way to indicate that but may be too subtle for the purpose of this diagram. Could have another diagram that has more details, the copyright, patents and trademark broken out for each one. Hope you are having a great day! Patrick But let's see what people think first.  /chet On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Greetings! After sleeping on the IP flow diagram it occurred to me that I omitted the copyright on OASIS text and the OASIS trademark references under the traditional OASIS TC IPR modes. Those are governed separately from IPR, the focus of this diagram, hence the oversight. Question: Is that too obvious to need mentioning separately on the far left under OASIS IPR Policy, which is a hyperlink to the four traditional modes? OASIS copyright on work products appears to be defined by Section 14 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/ipr#notices . I say appears to be because there may be other provisions that govern as well and I have not made an exhaustive search. OASIS trademark(s) appear to be defined by Section 5.3 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/ipr#s5.3 Taken as a whole, the OASIS IPR document covers patents, copyright and trademarks. From my reading of the various other license choices, I see gaps in their coverage and/or possible undefined relationships, such as with OASIS copyright. I'm not suggesting any resolution or position with this diagram. It is an attempt to tease out issues others will have to resolve. BTW, blame Chet for this graphic as he requested I put my mis-understanding of the process into graphical form. ;-) Hope everyone is having a great week! Patrick -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393   -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393  -- All the best, Ashok -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau Attachment: signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

I think eliminating the words after the first arrow and adding the comment should do it. Ashok On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 1:15 PM Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Ashok, Good point. I was thinking it emphasizes the same model persists to the end. Perhaps eliminating the words after the first arrow and a comment that initial choices are irrevocable for the life of the TC or project? Thanks! Hope you are looking forward to a great weekend! Patrick On 02/24/2017 02:01 PM, Ashok Malhotra wrote: From the diagram it looks like you can change the  IPR terms after every step.  This is misleading. Perhaps eliminate the words in the arrows after the first stage. Ashok On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 10:36 AM Chet Ensign < chet.ensign@oasis-open.org > wrote: You are correct. The TC is committed to the IPR mode from the start. I was thinking about when the license locks in for the work. In an open project, the license applies from the moment someone submits something to the project. On the TC Process, the IPR mode applies in a limited way for TC members during development. Then, once the CSD is approved as a Committee Specification, the IPR obligations lock in and apply to any conforming implementation.  On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Chet, Thanks! One comment/question below: On 02/24/2017 11:12 AM, Chet Ensign wrote: I like the diagram & I'm going to share it with the staff. It is a very simple graphic that would have eliminated a lot of head scratching had we put it this way earlier.  Not sure about copyright and trademark on the OASIS side but it probably wouldn't hurt to incorporate it somehow.  The other change that might be useful would be to color code the blocks and arrows in some way to show when the licensing locks in. Basically, TC and Committee draft would be a different color since the license terms aren't locked in until CS.  Err, depends on what you mean by "lock." I though once a TC chooses an IPR mode, that can't be changed. Yes? Or No? From the IPR Guidelines: "A TC may not change its IPR Mode without closing and submitting a new charter." While it is true that patent obligations "vest/bind/etc/" at CS, that's not the same as the IPR of the TC. Yes? Perhaps the IPR mode binds from the outset but the scope of the patent rights (and by implication your contribution to it) is set at the issuance of a CS. If anyone thinks that is a helpful distinction, color might be a way to indicate that but may be too subtle for the purpose of this diagram. Could have another diagram that has more details, the copyright, patents and trademark broken out for each one. Hope you are having a great day! Patrick But let's see what people think first.  /chet On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Greetings! After sleeping on the IP flow diagram it occurred to me that I omitted the copyright on OASIS text and the OASIS trademark references under the traditional OASIS TC IPR modes. Those are governed separately from IPR, the focus of this diagram, hence the oversight. Question: Is that too obvious to need mentioning separately on the far left under OASIS IPR Policy, which is a hyperlink to the four traditional modes? OASIS copyright on work products appears to be defined by Section 14 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/ipr#notices . I say "appears to be" because there may be other provisions that govern as well and I have not made an exhaustive search. OASIS trademark(s) appear to be defined by Section 5.3 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/ipr#s5.3 Taken as a whole, the OASIS IPR document covers patents, copyright and trademarks. From my reading of the various other license choices, I see gaps in their coverage and/or possible undefined relationships, such as with OASIS copyright. I'm not suggesting any resolution or position with this diagram. It is an attempt to tease out issues others will have to resolve. BTW, blame Chet for this graphic as he requested I put my mis-understanding of the process into graphical form. ;-) Hope everyone is having a great week! Patrick -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393   -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393  -- All the best, Ashok -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- All the best, Ashok

I agree. On Feb 24, 2017 2:25 PM, "Ashok Malhotra" < malhotrasahib@gmail.com > wrote: I think eliminating the words after the first arrow and adding the comment should do it. Ashok On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 1:15 PM Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Ashok, Good point. I was thinking it emphasizes the same model persists to the end. Perhaps eliminating the words after the first arrow and a comment that initial choices are irrevocable for the life of the TC or project? Thanks! Hope you are looking forward to a great weekend! Patrick On 02/24/2017 02:01 PM, Ashok Malhotra wrote: From the diagram it looks like you can change the  IPR terms after every step.  This is misleading. Perhaps eliminate the words in the arrows after the first stage. Ashok On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 10:36 AM Chet Ensign < chet.ensign@oasis-open.org > wrote: You are correct. The TC is committed to the IPR mode from the start. I was thinking about when the license locks in for the work. In an open project, the license applies from the moment someone submits something to the project. On the TC Process, the IPR mode applies in a limited way for TC members during development. Then, once the CSD is approved as a Committee Specification, the IPR obligations lock in and apply to any conforming implementation.  On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Chet, Thanks! One comment/question below: On 02/24/2017 11:12 AM, Chet Ensign wrote: I like the diagram & I'm going to share it with the staff. It is a very simple graphic that would have eliminated a lot of head scratching had we put it this way earlier.  Not sure about copyright and trademark on the OASIS side but it probably wouldn't hurt to incorporate it somehow.  The other change that might be useful would be to color code the blocks and arrows in some way to show when the licensing locks in. Basically, TC and Committee draft would be a different color since the license terms aren't locked in until CS.  Err, depends on what you mean by "lock." I though once a TC chooses an IPR mode, that can't be changed. Yes? Or No? From the IPR Guidelines: "A TC may not change its IPR Mode without closing and submitting a new charter." While it is true that patent obligations "vest/bind/etc/" at CS, that's not the same as the IPR of the TC. Yes? Perhaps the IPR mode binds from the outset but the scope of the patent rights (and by implication your contribution to it) is set at the issuance of a CS. If anyone thinks that is a helpful distinction, color might be a way to indicate that but may be too subtle for the purpose of this diagram. Could have another diagram that has more details, the copyright, patents and trademark broken out for each one. Hope you are having a great day! Patrick But let's see what people think first.  /chet On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Greetings! After sleeping on the IP flow diagram it occurred to me that I omitted the copyright on OASIS text and the OASIS trademark references under the traditional OASIS TC IPR modes. Those are governed separately from IPR, the focus of this diagram, hence the oversight. Question: Is that too obvious to need mentioning separately on the far left under OASIS IPR Policy, which is a hyperlink to the four traditional modes? OASIS copyright on work products appears to be defined by Section 14 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/ policies-guidelines/ipr# notices . I say "appears to be" because there may be other provisions that govern as well and I have not made an exhaustive search. OASIS trademark(s) appear to be defined by Section 5.3 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/ policies-guidelines/ipr#s5.3 Taken as a whole, the OASIS IPR document covers patents, copyright and trademarks. From my reading of the various other license choices, I see gaps in their coverage and/or possible undefined relationships, such as with OASIS copyright. I'm not suggesting any resolution or position with this diagram. It is an attempt to tease out issues others will have to resolve. BTW, blame Chet for this graphic as he requested I put my mis-understanding of the process into graphical form. ;-) Hope everyone is having a great week! Patrick -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393   -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393   -- All the best, Ashok -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- All the best, Ashok

OK, see how this works. I put the irrevocable note in between TC and Project. Hope everyone is starting a great weekend! Patrick On 02/24/2017 02:38 PM, Chet Ensign wrote: I agree. On Feb 24, 2017 2:25 PM, Ashok Malhotra < malhotrasahib@gmail.com > wrote: I think eliminating the words after the first arrow and adding the comment should do it. Ashok On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 1:15 PM Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Ashok, Good point. I was thinking it emphasizes the same model persists to the end. Perhaps eliminating the words after the first arrow and a comment that initial choices are irrevocable for the life of the TC or project? Thanks! Hope you are looking forward to a great weekend! Patrick On 02/24/2017 02:01 PM, Ashok Malhotra wrote: From the diagram it looks like you can change the  IPR terms after every step.  This is misleading. Perhaps eliminate the words in the arrows after the first stage. Ashok On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 10:36 AM Chet Ensign < chet.ensign@oasis-open.org > wrote: You are correct. The TC is committed to the IPR mode from the start. I was thinking about when the license locks in for the work. In an open project, the license applies from the moment someone submits something to the project. On the TC Process, the IPR mode applies in a limited way for TC members during development. Then, once the CSD is approved as a Committee Specification, the IPR obligations lock in and apply to any conforming implementation.  On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Chet, Thanks! One comment/question below: On 02/24/2017 11:12 AM, Chet Ensign wrote: I like the diagram & I'm going to share it with the staff. It is a very simple graphic that would have eliminated a lot of head scratching had we put it this way earlier.  Not sure about copyright and trademark on the OASIS side but it probably wouldn't hurt to incorporate it somehow.  The other change that might be useful would be to color code the blocks and arrows in some way to show when the licensing locks in. Basically, TC and Committee draft would be a different color since the license terms aren't locked in until CS.  Err, depends on what you mean by lock. I though once a TC chooses an IPR mode, that can't be changed. Yes? Or No? From the IPR Guidelines: A TC may not change its IPR Mode without closing and submitting a new charter. While it is true that patent obligations vest/bind/etc/ at CS, that's not the same as the IPR of the TC. Yes? Perhaps the IPR mode binds from the outset but the scope of the patent rights (and by implication your contribution to it) is set at the issuance of a CS. If anyone thinks that is a helpful distinction, color might be a way to indicate that but may be too subtle for the purpose of this diagram. Could have another diagram that has more details, the copyright, patents and trademark broken out for each one. Hope you are having a great day! Patrick But let's see what people think first.  /chet On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Greetings! After sleeping on the IP flow diagram it occurred to me that I omitted the copyright on OASIS text and the OASIS trademark references under the traditional OASIS TC IPR modes. Those are governed separately from IPR, the focus of this diagram, hence the oversight. Question: Is that too obvious to need mentioning separately on the far left under OASIS IPR Policy, which is a hyperlink to the four traditional modes? OASIS copyright on work products appears to be defined by Section 14 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/ policies-guidelines/ipr# notices . I say appears to be because there may be other provisions that govern as well and I have not made an exhaustive search. OASIS trademark(s) appear to be defined by Section 5.3 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/ policies-guidelines/ipr#s5.3 Taken as a whole, the OASIS IPR document covers patents, copyright and trademarks. From my reading of the various other license choices, I see gaps in their coverage and/or possible undefined relationships, such as with OASIS copyright. I'm not suggesting any resolution or position with this diagram. It is an attempt to tease out issues others will have to resolve. BTW, blame Chet for this graphic as he requested I put my mis-understanding of the process into graphical form. ;-) Hope everyone is having a great week! Patrick -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393   -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393   -- All the best, Ashok -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- All the best, Ashok -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau Attachment: oasis-ip-vs-ipr-4.odg Description: application/vnd.oasis.opendocument.graphics Attachment: oasis-ip-vs-ipr-4.pdf Description: Adobe PDF document Attachment: signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Terminology discomfort:
(a)    
Isn’t “Project specification” misleading ? it suggests that this is just the initial design of a “project” – its “specs”. A Project specification
is just a part of an open source project, in people’s mind.
(b)    
We may want the term “Project” to apply to the entire [multipart] work product, not just to the OSS part. I believe there was a proposed renaming
of TC, as Project Committee? or Project team?
(c)    
The project has a specification part(s), and a software (or implementation? Or executable?) part.
 
Food for thought…
-jacques
 


From: tab@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:tab@lists.oasis-open.org]
On Behalf Of Patrick Durusau
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2017 2:22 PM
To: tab@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [tab] After sleeping on IP flow diagram


 
OK, see how this works. I put the irrevocable note in between TC and Project.
Hope everyone is starting a great weekend!
Patrick
 

On 02/24/2017 02:38 PM, Chet Ensign wrote:



I agree.


 

On Feb 24, 2017 2:25 PM, "Ashok Malhotra" < malhotrasahib@gmail.com > wrote:


I think eliminating the words after the first arrow and adding the comment should do it.



Ashok


 


On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 1:15 PM Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote:



Ashok,
Good point. I was thinking it emphasizes the same model persists to the end.

Perhaps eliminating the words after the first arrow and a comment that initial choices are irrevocable for the life of the TC or project?
Thanks!
Hope you are looking forward to a great weekend!


Patrick


 

On 02/24/2017 02:01 PM, Ashok Malhotra wrote:




From the diagram it looks like you can change the 



IPR terms after every step.  This is misleading.


Perhaps eliminate the words in the arrows after the first stage.


Ashok


 


On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 10:36 AM Chet Ensign < chet.ensign@oasis-open.org > wrote:



You are correct. The TC is committed to the IPR mode from the start. I was thinking about when the license locks in for the work. In an open project, the license applies from the moment someone submits something to the project. On the TC
Process, the IPR mode applies in a limited way for TC members during development. Then, once the CSD is approved as a Committee Specification, the IPR obligations lock in and apply to any conforming implementation. 


 


 



 

On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Patrick Durusau
< patrick@durusau.net > wrote:

Chet,
Thanks!
One comment/question below:
 

On 02/24/2017 11:12 AM, Chet Ensign wrote:



I like the diagram & I'm going to share it with the staff. It is a very simple graphic that would have eliminated a lot of head scratching had we put it this way earlier. 


 


Not sure about copyright and trademark on the OASIS side but it probably wouldn't hurt to incorporate it somehow. 


 


The other change that might be useful would be to color code the blocks and arrows in some way to show when the licensing locks in. Basically, TC and Committee draft would be a different color since the license terms aren't locked in until
CS. 


 



Err, depends on what you mean by "lock." I though once a TC chooses an IPR mode, that can't be changed. Yes? Or No?

From the IPR Guidelines:

"A TC may not change its IPR Mode without closing and submitting a new charter."

While it is true that patent obligations "vest/bind/etc/" at CS, that's not the same as the IPR of the TC.


Yes?

Perhaps the IPR mode binds from the outset but the scope of the patent rights (and by implication your contribution to it) is set at the issuance of a CS.


If anyone thinks that is a helpful distinction, color might be a way to indicate that but may be too subtle for the purpose of this diagram. Could have another diagram that has more details, the copyright, patents and trademark broken out for each one.


Hope you are having a great day!

Patrick










But let's see what people think first. 


 


/chet


 



 

On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Patrick Durusau
< patrick@durusau.net > wrote:
Greetings!

After sleeping on the IP flow diagram it occurred to me that I omitted
the copyright on OASIS text and the OASIS trademark references under the
traditional OASIS TC IPR modes.

Those are governed separately from IPR, the focus of this diagram, hence
the oversight.

Question:

Is that too obvious to need mentioning separately on the far left under
OASIS IPR Policy, which is a hyperlink to the four traditional modes?

OASIS copyright on work products appears to be defined by Section 14 of
the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy,
https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/ipr#notices .

I say "appears to be" because there may be other provisions that govern
as well and I have not made an exhaustive search.

OASIS trademark(s) appear to be defined by Section 5.3 of the
Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy,
https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/ipr#s5.3

Taken as a whole, the OASIS IPR document covers patents, copyright and
trademarks.

From my reading of the various other license choices, I see gaps in
their coverage and/or possible undefined relationships, such as with
OASIS copyright.

I'm not suggesting any resolution or position with this diagram. It is
an attempt to tease out issues others will have to resolve.

BTW, blame Chet for this graphic as he requested I put my
mis-understanding of the process into graphical form. ;-)

Hope everyone is having a great week!

Patrick


--
Patrick Durusau
patrick@durusau.net
Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB)
Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300
Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)

Another Word For It (blog):
http://tm.durusau.net
Homepage:
http://www.durusau.net
Twitter: patrickDurusau







 

--





/chet 
----------------
Chet Ensign
Director of Standards Development and TC Administration 
OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society
http://www.oasis-open.org

Primary: +1 973-996-2298
Mobile: +1 201-341-1393  








--
Patrick Durusau
patrick@durusau.net
Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB)
Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300
Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)
 
Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net
Homepage: http://www.durusau.net
Twitter: patrickDurusau








 

--





/chet 
----------------
Chet Ensign
Director of Standards Development and TC Administration 
OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society
http://www.oasis-open.org

Primary: +1 973-996-2298
Mobile: +1 201-341-1393  









--


All the best, Ashok





--
Patrick Durusau
patrick@durusau.net
Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB)
Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300
Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)
 
Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net
Homepage: http://www.durusau.net
Twitter: patrickDurusau





--


All the best, Ashok







--
Patrick Durusau
patrick@durusau.net
Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB)
Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300
Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)
 
Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net
Homepage: http://www.durusau.net
Twitter: patrickDurusau


This e-mail and any attached files are only for the use of its intended recipient(s). Its contents are confidential and may be privileged. Fujitsu does not guarantee that this e-mail has not
been intercepted and amended or that it is virus free. If you have received this e-mail and are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by e-mail and destroy all copies of this e-mail and any attachments. / Le présent courriel, ainsi que ses
pièces jointes, ne peut être utilisé que par le ou les destinataires auxquels il a été transmis. Les renseignements qu'il contient sont confidentiels, voire même protégés. Fujitsu ne peut garantir que ce courriel n'a pas été intercepté ou modifié, ou qu'il
ne contient aucun virus. Si vous avez reçu ce courriel sans en être le destinataire prévu, veuillez communiquer par courriel avec son expéditeur et en détruire toutes les copies et pièces jointes.

Jacques, I'm not tied to project specification but that is what I heard the term was for after multiple releases, the equivalent to a committee specification was going to be called. I may have mis-heard/understood. I'm not at all sure what the parts of a project, code, documentation (I would call that part a specification), binaries, etc. are going to be called. The purpose of the graphic was to illustrate the binding of IPR or license at the inception of a TC or Project and that as I understood it, there is no magic moment when the IPR or license becomes something else. For example, if you use the Apache 2.0 license, how does that interact with the general OASIS copyright on the text of an Oasis Standard? Which I understand cannot be forked under the Oasis copyright? But can be under an Apache 2.0 license. If anything, I think there are a number of naming, parts, what applies to them to be teased out. Suggestions on what artifacts could be produced by a TC or project? Thinking a list of those down one side and the IPR or License across the top might be a useful tool. Not for staking a claim to any answer but to look for places where there is none and/or differing opinions on the answer. Hope you have started a great weekend! Patrick On 02/24/2017 09:46 PM, JDurand@us.fujitsu.com wrote: Terminology discomfort: (a)     Isn’t “Project specification” misleading ? it suggests that this is just the initial design of a “project” – its “specs”. A Project specification is just a part of an open source project, in people’s mind. (b)     We may want the term “Project” to apply to the entire [multipart] work product, not just to the OSS part. I believe there was a proposed renaming of TC, as Project Committee? or Project team? (c)     The project has a specification part(s), and a software (or implementation? Or executable?) part.   Food for thought… -jacques   From: tab@lists.oasis-open.org [ mailto:tab@lists.oasis-open.org ] On Behalf Of Patrick Durusau Sent: Friday, February 24, 2017 2:22 PM To: tab@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [tab] After sleeping on IP flow diagram   OK, see how this works. I put the irrevocable note in between TC and Project. Hope everyone is starting a great weekend! Patrick   On 02/24/2017 02:38 PM, Chet Ensign wrote: I agree.   On Feb 24, 2017 2:25 PM, Ashok Malhotra < malhotrasahib@gmail.com > wrote: I think eliminating the words after the first arrow and adding the comment should do it. Ashok   On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 1:15 PM Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Ashok, Good point. I was thinking it emphasizes the same model persists to the end. Perhaps eliminating the words after the first arrow and a comment that initial choices are irrevocable for the life of the TC or project? Thanks! Hope you are looking forward to a great weekend! Patrick   On 02/24/2017 02:01 PM, Ashok Malhotra wrote: From the diagram it looks like you can change the  IPR terms after every step.  This is misleading. Perhaps eliminate the words in the arrows after the first stage. Ashok   On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 10:36 AM Chet Ensign < chet.ensign@oasis-open.org > wrote: You are correct. The TC is committed to the IPR mode from the start. I was thinking about when the license locks in for the work. In an open project, the license applies from the moment someone submits something to the project. On the TC Process, the IPR mode applies in a limited way for TC members during development. Then, once the CSD is approved as a Committee Specification, the IPR obligations lock in and apply to any conforming implementation.        On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Chet, Thanks! One comment/question below:   On 02/24/2017 11:12 AM, Chet Ensign wrote: I like the diagram & I'm going to share it with the staff. It is a very simple graphic that would have eliminated a lot of head scratching had we put it this way earlier.    Not sure about copyright and trademark on the OASIS side but it probably wouldn't hurt to incorporate it somehow.    The other change that might be useful would be to color code the blocks and arrows in some way to show when the licensing locks in. Basically, TC and Committee draft would be a different color since the license terms aren't locked in until CS.    Err, depends on what you mean by lock. I though once a TC chooses an IPR mode, that can't be changed. Yes? Or No? From the IPR Guidelines: A TC may not change its IPR Mode without closing and submitting a new charter. While it is true that patent obligations vest/bind/etc/ at CS, that's not the same as the IPR of the TC. Yes? Perhaps the IPR mode binds from the outset but the scope of the patent rights (and by implication your contribution to it) is set at the issuance of a CS. If anyone thinks that is a helpful distinction, color might be a way to indicate that but may be too subtle for the purpose of this diagram. Could have another diagram that has more details, the copyright, patents and trademark broken out for each one. Hope you are having a great day! Patrick But let's see what people think first.    /chet     On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Greetings! After sleeping on the IP flow diagram it occurred to me that I omitted the copyright on OASIS text and the OASIS trademark references under the traditional OASIS TC IPR modes. Those are governed separately from IPR, the focus of this diagram, hence the oversight. Question: Is that too obvious to need mentioning separately on the far left under OASIS IPR Policy, which is a hyperlink to the four traditional modes? OASIS copyright on work products appears to be defined by Section 14 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/ipr#notices . I say appears to be because there may be other provisions that govern as well and I have not made an exhaustive search. OASIS trademark(s) appear to be defined by Section 5.3 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/ipr#s5.3 Taken as a whole, the OASIS IPR document covers patents, copyright and trademarks. From my reading of the various other license choices, I see gaps in their coverage and/or possible undefined relationships, such as with OASIS copyright. I'm not suggesting any resolution or position with this diagram. It is an attempt to tease out issues others will have to resolve. BTW, blame Chet for this graphic as he requested I put my mis-understanding of the process into graphical form. ;-) Hope everyone is having a great week! Patrick -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau   -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393   -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)   Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau   -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393   -- All the best, Ashok -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)   Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- All the best, Ashok -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)   Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau This e-mail and any attached files are only for the use of its intended recipient(s). Its contents are confidential and may be privileged. Fujitsu does not guarantee that this e-mail has not been intercepted and amended or that it is virus free. If you have received this e-mail and are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by e-mail and destroy all copies of this e-mail and any attachments. / Le présent courriel, ainsi que ses pièces jointes, ne peut être utilisé que par le ou les destinataires auxquels il a été transmis. Les renseignements qu'il contient sont confidentiels, voire même protégés. Fujitsu ne peut garantir que ce courriel n'a pas été intercepté ou modifié, ou qu'il ne contient aucun virus. Si vous avez reçu ce courriel sans en être le destinataire prévu, veuillez communiquer par courriel avec son expéditeur et en détruire toutes les copies et pièces jointes. -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau Attachment: signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

FWIW,  I understand Patrick' intent is to: "... to illustrate the binding of IPR or license at the inception of a TC or Project and that as I understood it, there is no magic moment when the IPR or license becomes something else." But, I think this graphic fails to represent what I think is a fundamental difference between standards and OS work: when is the IPR/License commitment available to potential implementers. While TC making Standards commit to an IPR Mode at its inception - the IPR "protection" is not available to implementers until Specification is voted.  This compares to OS Projects outputs for which the OS License is available the moment the contribution/commit is done.  I think this "time to availability" contributes to the perception that "standards are too slow". Scott...  On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 10:00 PM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Jacques, I'm not tied to "project specification" but that is what I heard the term was for after multiple "releases," the equivalent to a committee specification was going to be called. I may have mis-heard/understood. I'm not at all sure what the parts of a project, code, documentation (I would call that part a specification), binaries, etc. are going to be called. The purpose of the graphic was to illustrate the binding of IPR or license at the inception of a TC or Project and that as I understood it, there is no magic moment when the IPR or license becomes something else. For example, if you use the Apache 2.0 license, how does that interact with the general OASIS copyright on the text of an Oasis Standard? Which I understand cannot be forked under the Oasis copyright? But can be under an Apache 2.0 license. If anything, I think there are a number of naming, parts, what applies to them to be teased out. Suggestions on what "artifacts" could be produced by a TC or project? Thinking a list of those down one side and the IPR or License across the top might be a useful tool. Not for staking a claim to any answer but to look for places where there is none and/or differing opinions on the answer. Hope you have started a great weekend! Patrick On 02/24/2017 09:46 PM, JDurand@us.fujitsu.com wrote: Terminology discomfort: (a)     Isn’t “Project specification” misleading ? it suggests that this is just the initial design of a “project” – its “specs”. A Project specification is just a part of an open source project, in people’s mind. (b)     We may want the term “Project” to apply to the entire [multipart] work product, not just to the OSS part. I believe there was a proposed renaming of TC, as Project Committee? or Project team? (c)     The project has a specification part(s), and a software (or implementation? Or executable?) part.   Food for thought… -jacques   From: tab@lists.oasis-open.org [ mailto:tab@lists.oasis-open. org ] On Behalf Of Patrick Durusau Sent: Friday, February 24, 2017 2:22 PM To: tab@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [tab] After sleeping on IP flow diagram   OK, see how this works. I put the irrevocable note in between TC and Project. Hope everyone is starting a great weekend! Patrick   On 02/24/2017 02:38 PM, Chet Ensign wrote: I agree.   On Feb 24, 2017 2:25 PM, "Ashok Malhotra" < malhotrasahib@gmail.com > wrote: I think eliminating the words after the first arrow and adding the comment should do it. Ashok   On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 1:15 PM Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Ashok, Good point. I was thinking it emphasizes the same model persists to the end. Perhaps eliminating the words after the first arrow and a comment that initial choices are irrevocable for the life of the TC or project? Thanks! Hope you are looking forward to a great weekend! Patrick   On 02/24/2017 02:01 PM, Ashok Malhotra wrote: From the diagram it looks like you can change the  IPR terms after every step.  This is misleading. Perhaps eliminate the words in the arrows after the first stage. Ashok   On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 10:36 AM Chet Ensign < chet.ensign@oasis-open.org > wrote: You are correct. The TC is committed to the IPR mode from the start. I was thinking about when the license locks in for the work. In an open project, the license applies from the moment someone submits something to the project. On the TC Process, the IPR mode applies in a limited way for TC members during development. Then, once the CSD is approved as a Committee Specification, the IPR obligations lock in and apply to any conforming implementation.        On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Chet, Thanks! One comment/question below:   On 02/24/2017 11:12 AM, Chet Ensign wrote: I like the diagram & I'm going to share it with the staff. It is a very simple graphic that would have eliminated a lot of head scratching had we put it this way earlier.    Not sure about copyright and trademark on the OASIS side but it probably wouldn't hurt to incorporate it somehow.    The other change that might be useful would be to color code the blocks and arrows in some way to show when the licensing locks in. Basically, TC and Committee draft would be a different color since the license terms aren't locked in until CS.    Err, depends on what you mean by "lock." I though once a TC chooses an IPR mode, that can't be changed. Yes? Or No? From the IPR Guidelines: "A TC may not change its IPR Mode without closing and submitting a new charter." While it is true that patent obligations "vest/bind/etc/" at CS, that's not the same as the IPR of the TC. Yes? Perhaps the IPR mode binds from the outset but the scope of the patent rights (and by implication your contribution to it) is set at the issuance of a CS. If anyone thinks that is a helpful distinction, color might be a way to indicate that but may be too subtle for the purpose of this diagram. Could have another diagram that has more details, the copyright, patents and trademark broken out for each one. Hope you are having a great day! Patrick But let's see what people think first.    /chet     On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Greetings! After sleeping on the IP flow diagram it occurred to me that I omitted the copyright on OASIS text and the OASIS trademark references under the traditional OASIS TC IPR modes. Those are governed separately from IPR, the focus of this diagram, hence the oversight. Question: Is that too obvious to need mentioning separately on the far left under OASIS IPR Policy, which is a hyperlink to the four traditional modes? OASIS copyright on work products appears to be defined by Section 14 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/ policies-guidelines/ipr# notices . I say "appears to be" because there may be other provisions that govern as well and I have not made an exhaustive search. OASIS trademark(s) appear to be defined by Section 5.3 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/ policies-guidelines/ipr#s5.3 Taken as a whole, the OASIS IPR document covers patents, copyright and trademarks. From my reading of the various other license choices, I see gaps in their coverage and/or possible undefined relationships, such as with OASIS copyright. I'm not suggesting any resolution or position with this diagram. It is an attempt to tease out issues others will have to resolve. BTW, blame Chet for this graphic as he requested I put my mis-understanding of the process into graphical form. ;-) Hope everyone is having a great week! Patrick -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau   -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393   -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)   Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau   -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393   -- All the best, Ashok -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)   Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- All the best, Ashok -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)   Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau This e-mail and any attached files are only for the use of its intended recipient(s). Its contents are confidential and may be privileged. Fujitsu does not guarantee that this e-mail has not been intercepted and amended or that it is virus free. If you have received this e-mail and are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by e-mail and destroy all copies of this e-mail and any attachments. / Le présent courriel, ainsi que ses pièces jointes, ne peut être utilisé que par le ou les destinataires auxquels il a été transmis. Les renseignements qu'il contient sont confidentiels, voire même protégés. Fujitsu ne peut garantir que ce courriel n'a pas été intercepté ou modifié, ou qu'il ne contient aucun virus. Si vous avez reçu ce courriel sans en être le destinataire prévu, veuillez communiquer par courriel avec son expéditeur et en détruire toutes les copies et pièces jointes. -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- Scott McGrath COO scott.mcgrath@oasis-open.org Tel +1 781-425-5073 x202 Fax +1 781-425-5072 Follow OASIS on: LinkedIn:     http://linkd.in/OASISopen Twitter:         http://twitter.com/OASISopen Facebook:   http://facebook.com/oasis.open

Scott, Thanks! OK, but isn't there a separate obligation to commit when a contribution is made? ***** 9.2 A TC Party has a Participation Obligation to license or provide under non-assertion covenant as appropriate for the IPR mode, as described in Section 10, any claims under its patents or patent applications that would be Essential Claims in the then current OASIS Standards Draft Deliverable, if that draft subsequently becomes an OASIS Standards Final Deliverable, even if the TC Party is not a Contributor, when all of the following conditions are met: ***** That is upon contribution there is an obligation on the contributor and then, separately, there is an IPR protection upon becoming a Final Deliverable? Not sure how I would capture that in the graphic but concede your point about the separate IPR protection as well. Suggestions? Thanks again! Hope you are having a great week! Patrick On 02/27/2017 12:40 PM, Scott McGrath wrote: FWIW,  I understand Patrick' intent is to: ... to illustrate the binding of IPR or license at the inception of a TC or Project and that as I understood it, there is no magic moment when the IPR or license becomes something else. But, I think this graphic fails to represent what I think is a fundamental difference between standards and OS work: when is the IPR/License commitment available to potential implementers. While TC making Standards commit to an IPR Mode at its inception - the IPR protection is not available to implementers until Specification is voted.  This compares to OS Projects outputs for which the OS License is available the moment the contribution/commit is done.  I think this time to availability contributes to the perception that standards are too slow . Scott...  On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 10:00 PM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Jacques, I'm not tied to project specification but that is what I heard the term was for after multiple releases, the equivalent to a committee specification was going to be called. I may have mis-heard/understood. I'm not at all sure what the parts of a project, code, documentation (I would call that part a specification), binaries, etc. are going to be called. The purpose of the graphic was to illustrate the binding of IPR or license at the inception of a TC or Project and that as I understood it, there is no magic moment when the IPR or license becomes something else. For example, if you use the Apache 2.0 license, how does that interact with the general OASIS copyright on the text of an Oasis Standard? Which I understand cannot be forked under the Oasis copyright? But can be under an Apache 2.0 license. If anything, I think there are a number of naming, parts, what applies to them to be teased out. Suggestions on what artifacts could be produced by a TC or project? Thinking a list of those down one side and the IPR or License across the top might be a useful tool. Not for staking a claim to any answer but to look for places where there is none and/or differing opinions on the answer. Hope you have started a great weekend! Patrick On 02/24/2017 09:46 PM, JDurand@us.fujitsu.com wrote: Terminology discomfort: (a)     Isn’t “Project specification” misleading ? it suggests that this is just the initial design of a “project” – its “specs”. A Project specification is just a part of an open source project, in people’s mind. (b)     We may want the term “Project” to apply to the entire [multipart] work product, not just to the OSS part. I believe there was a proposed renaming of TC, as Project Committee? or Project team? (c)     The project has a specification part(s), and a software (or implementation? Or executable?) part.   Food for thought… -jacques   From: tab@lists.oasis-open.org [ mailto:tab@lists.oasis-open. org ] On Behalf Of Patrick Durusau Sent: Friday, February 24, 2017 2:22 PM To: tab@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [tab] After sleeping on IP flow diagram   OK, see how this works. I put the irrevocable note in between TC and Project. Hope everyone is starting a great weekend! Patrick   On 02/24/2017 02:38 PM, Chet Ensign wrote: I agree.   On Feb 24, 2017 2:25 PM, Ashok Malhotra < malhotrasahib@gmail.com > wrote: I think eliminating the words after the first arrow and adding the comment should do it. Ashok   On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 1:15 PM Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Ashok, Good point. I was thinking it emphasizes the same model persists to the end. Perhaps eliminating the words after the first arrow and a comment that initial choices are irrevocable for the life of the TC or project? Thanks! Hope you are looking forward to a great weekend! Patrick   On 02/24/2017 02:01 PM, Ashok Malhotra wrote: From the diagram it looks like you can change the  IPR terms after every step.  This is misleading. Perhaps eliminate the words in the arrows after the first stage. Ashok   On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 10:36 AM Chet Ensign < chet.ensign@oasis-open.org > wrote: You are correct. The TC is committed to the IPR mode from the start. I was thinking about when the license locks in for the work. In an open project, the license applies from the moment someone submits something to the project. On the TC Process, the IPR mode applies in a limited way for TC members during development. Then, once the CSD is approved as a Committee Specification, the IPR obligations lock in and apply to any conforming implementation.        On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Chet, Thanks! One comment/question below:   On 02/24/2017 11:12 AM, Chet Ensign wrote: I like the diagram & I'm going to share it with the staff. It is a very simple graphic that would have eliminated a lot of head scratching had we put it this way earlier.    Not sure about copyright and trademark on the OASIS side but it probably wouldn't hurt to incorporate it somehow.    The other change that might be useful would be to color code the blocks and arrows in some way to show when the licensing locks in. Basically, TC and Committee draft would be a different color since the license terms aren't locked in until CS.    Err, depends on what you mean by lock. I though once a TC chooses an IPR mode, that can't be changed. Yes? Or No? From the IPR Guidelines: A TC may not change its IPR Mode without closing and submitting a new charter. While it is true that patent obligations vest/bind/etc/ at CS, that's not the same as the IPR of the TC. Yes? Perhaps the IPR mode binds from the outset but the scope of the patent rights (and by implication your contribution to it) is set at the issuance of a CS. If anyone thinks that is a helpful distinction, color might be a way to indicate that but may be too subtle for the purpose of this diagram. Could have another diagram that has more details, the copyright, patents and trademark broken out for each one. Hope you are having a great day! Patrick But let's see what people think first.    /chet     On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Greetings! After sleeping on the IP flow diagram it occurred to me that I omitted the copyright on OASIS text and the OASIS trademark references under the traditional OASIS TC IPR modes. Those are governed separately from IPR, the focus of this diagram, hence the oversight. Question: Is that too obvious to need mentioning separately on the far left under OASIS IPR Policy, which is a hyperlink to the four traditional modes? OASIS copyright on work products appears to be defined by Section 14 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/ policies-guidelines/ipr# notices . I say appears to be because there may be other provisions that govern as well and I have not made an exhaustive search. OASIS trademark(s) appear to be defined by Section 5.3 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/ policies-guidelines/ipr#s5.3 Taken as a whole, the OASIS IPR document covers patents, copyright and trademarks. From my reading of the various other license choices, I see gaps in their coverage and/or possible undefined relationships, such as with OASIS copyright. I'm not suggesting any resolution or position with this diagram. It is an attempt to tease out issues others will have to resolve. BTW, blame Chet for this graphic as he requested I put my mis-understanding of the process into graphical form. ;-) Hope everyone is having a great week! Patrick -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau   -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393   -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)   Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau   -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393   -- All the best, Ashok -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)   Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- All the best, Ashok -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)   Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau This e-mail and any attached files are only for the use of its intended recipient(s). Its contents are confidential and may be privileged. Fujitsu does not guarantee that this e-mail has not been intercepted and amended or that it is virus free. If you have received this e-mail and are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by e-mail and destroy all copies of this e-mail and any attachments. / Le présent courriel, ainsi que ses pièces jointes, ne peut être utilisé que par le ou les destinataires auxquels il a été transmis. Les renseignements qu'il contient sont confidentiels, voire même protégés. Fujitsu ne peut garantir que ce courriel n'a pas été intercepté ou modifié, ou qu'il ne contient aucun virus. Si vous avez reçu ce courriel sans en être le destinataire prévu, veuillez communiquer par courriel avec son expéditeur et en détruire toutes les copies et pièces jointes. -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- Scott McGrath COO scott.mcgrath@oasis-open.org Tel +1 781-425-5073 x202 Fax +1 781-425-5072 Follow OASIS on: LinkedIn:     http://linkd.in/OASISopen Twitter:         http://twitter.com/OASISopen Facebook:   http://facebook.com/oasis.open -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau Attachment: signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

I (not the TC expert) believe that YES a commitment to license is made by your participation in or contribution to a TC, BUT that commitment is not fulfilled unless and until the Specification ballot passes.  That could mean a lag of weeks, or months before something that is visible can't be legally used.  And the case of some TCs, that lag becomes forever.  On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 4:11 PM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Scott, Thanks! OK, but isn't there a separate obligation to commit when a contribution is made? ***** 9.2 A TC Party has a Participation Obligation to license or provide under non-assertion covenant as appropriate for the IPR mode, as described in Section 10, any claims under its patents or patent applications that would be Essential Claims in the then current OASIS Standards Draft Deliverable, if that draft subsequently becomes an OASIS Standards Final Deliverable, even if the TC Party is not a Contributor, when all of the following conditions are met: ***** That is upon contribution there is an obligation on the contributor and then, separately, there is an IPR protection upon becoming a "Final Deliverable?" Not sure how I would capture that in the graphic but concede your point about the separate IPR protection as well. Suggestions? Thanks again! Hope you are having a great week! Patrick On 02/27/2017 12:40 PM, Scott McGrath wrote: FWIW,  I understand Patrick' intent is to: "... to illustrate the binding of IPR or license at the inception of a TC or Project and that as I understood it, there is no magic moment when the IPR or license becomes something else." But, I think this graphic fails to represent what I think is a fundamental difference between standards and OS work: when is the IPR/License commitment available to potential implementers. While TC making Standards commit to an IPR Mode at its inception - the IPR "protection" is not available to implementers until Specification is voted.  This compares to OS Projects outputs for which the OS License is available the moment the contribution/commit is done.  I think this "time to availability" contributes to the perception that "standards are too slow". Scott...  On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 10:00 PM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Jacques, I'm not tied to "project specification" but that is what I heard the term was for after multiple "releases," the equivalent to a committee specification was going to be called. I may have mis-heard/understood. I'm not at all sure what the parts of a project, code, documentation (I would call that part a specification), binaries, etc. are going to be called. The purpose of the graphic was to illustrate the binding of IPR or license at the inception of a TC or Project and that as I understood it, there is no magic moment when the IPR or license becomes something else. For example, if you use the Apache 2.0 license, how does that interact with the general OASIS copyright on the text of an Oasis Standard? Which I understand cannot be forked under the Oasis copyright? But can be under an Apache 2.0 license. If anything, I think there are a number of naming, parts, what applies to them to be teased out. Suggestions on what "artifacts" could be produced by a TC or project? Thinking a list of those down one side and the IPR or License across the top might be a useful tool. Not for staking a claim to any answer but to look for places where there is none and/or differing opinions on the answer. Hope you have started a great weekend! Patrick On 02/24/2017 09:46 PM, JDurand@us.fujitsu.com wrote: Terminology discomfort: (a)     Isn’t “Project specification” misleading ? it suggests that this is just the initial design of a “project” – its “specs”. A Project specification is just a part of an open source project, in people’s mind. (b)     We may want the term “Project” to apply to the entire [multipart] work product, not just to the OSS part. I believe there was a proposed renaming of TC, as Project Committee? or Project team? (c)     The project has a specification part(s), and a software (or implementation? Or executable?) part.   Food for thought… -jacques   From: tab@lists.oasis-open.org [ mailto:tab@lists.oasis-open.o rg ] On Behalf Of Patrick Durusau Sent: Friday, February 24, 2017 2:22 PM To: tab@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [tab] After sleeping on IP flow diagram   OK, see how this works. I put the irrevocable note in between TC and Project. Hope everyone is starting a great weekend! Patrick   On 02/24/2017 02:38 PM, Chet Ensign wrote: I agree.   On Feb 24, 2017 2:25 PM, "Ashok Malhotra" < malhotrasahib@gmail.com > wrote: I think eliminating the words after the first arrow and adding the comment should do it. Ashok   On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 1:15 PM Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Ashok, Good point. I was thinking it emphasizes the same model persists to the end. Perhaps eliminating the words after the first arrow and a comment that initial choices are irrevocable for the life of the TC or project? Thanks! Hope you are looking forward to a great weekend! Patrick   On 02/24/2017 02:01 PM, Ashok Malhotra wrote: From the diagram it looks like you can change the  IPR terms after every step.  This is misleading. Perhaps eliminate the words in the arrows after the first stage. Ashok   On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 10:36 AM Chet Ensign < chet.ensign@oasis-open.org > wrote: You are correct. The TC is committed to the IPR mode from the start. I was thinking about when the license locks in for the work. In an open project, the license applies from the moment someone submits something to the project. On the TC Process, the IPR mode applies in a limited way for TC members during development. Then, once the CSD is approved as a Committee Specification, the IPR obligations lock in and apply to any conforming implementation.        On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Chet, Thanks! One comment/question below:   On 02/24/2017 11:12 AM, Chet Ensign wrote: I like the diagram & I'm going to share it with the staff. It is a very simple graphic that would have eliminated a lot of head scratching had we put it this way earlier.    Not sure about copyright and trademark on the OASIS side but it probably wouldn't hurt to incorporate it somehow.    The other change that might be useful would be to color code the blocks and arrows in some way to show when the licensing locks in. Basically, TC and Committee draft would be a different color since the license terms aren't locked in until CS.    Err, depends on what you mean by "lock." I though once a TC chooses an IPR mode, that can't be changed. Yes? Or No? From the IPR Guidelines: "A TC may not change its IPR Mode without closing and submitting a new charter." While it is true that patent obligations "vest/bind/etc/" at CS, that's not the same as the IPR of the TC. Yes? Perhaps the IPR mode binds from the outset but the scope of the patent rights (and by implication your contribution to it) is set at the issuance of a CS. If anyone thinks that is a helpful distinction, color might be a way to indicate that but may be too subtle for the purpose of this diagram. Could have another diagram that has more details, the copyright, patents and trademark broken out for each one. Hope you are having a great day! Patrick But let's see what people think first.    /chet     On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Greetings! After sleeping on the IP flow diagram it occurred to me that I omitted the copyright on OASIS text and the OASIS trademark references under the traditional OASIS TC IPR modes. Those are governed separately from IPR, the focus of this diagram, hence the oversight. Question: Is that too obvious to need mentioning separately on the far left under OASIS IPR Policy, which is a hyperlink to the four traditional modes? OASIS copyright on work products appears to be defined by Section 14 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/pol icies-guidelines/ipr#notices . I say "appears to be" because there may be other provisions that govern as well and I have not made an exhaustive search. OASIS trademark(s) appear to be defined by Section 5.3 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/pol icies-guidelines/ipr#s5.3 Taken as a whole, the OASIS IPR document covers patents, copyright and trademarks. From my reading of the various other license choices, I see gaps in their coverage and/or possible undefined relationships, such as with OASIS copyright. I'm not suggesting any resolution or position with this diagram. It is an attempt to tease out issues others will have to resolve. BTW, blame Chet for this graphic as he requested I put my mis-understanding of the process into graphical form. ;-) Hope everyone is having a great week! Patrick -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau   -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393   -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)   Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau   -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393   -- All the best, Ashok -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)   Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- All the best, Ashok -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)   Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau This e-mail and any attached files are only for the use of its intended recipient(s). Its contents are confidential and may be privileged. Fujitsu does not guarantee that this e-mail has not been intercepted and amended or that it is virus free. If you have received this e-mail and are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by e-mail and destroy all copies of this e-mail and any attachments. / Le présent courriel, ainsi que ses pièces jointes, ne peut être utilisé que par le ou les destinataires auxquels il a été transmis. Les renseignements qu'il contient sont confidentiels, voire même protégés. Fujitsu ne peut garantir que ce courriel n'a pas été intercepté ou modifié, ou qu'il ne contient aucun virus. Si vous avez reçu ce courriel sans en être le destinataire prévu, veuillez communiquer par courriel avec son expéditeur et en détruire toutes les copies et pièces jointes. -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- Scott McGrath COO scott.mcgrath@oasis-open.org Tel +1 781-425-5073 x202 Fax +1 781-425-5072 Follow OASIS on: LinkedIn:     http://linkd.in/OASISopen Twitter:         http://twitter.com/OASISopen Facebook:   http://facebook.com/oasis. open -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- Scott McGrath COO scott.mcgrath@oasis-open.org Tel +1 781-425-5073 x202 Fax +1 781-425-5072 Follow OASIS on: LinkedIn:     http://linkd.in/OASISopen Twitter:         http://twitter.com/OASISopen Facebook:   http://facebook.com/oasis.open

Oh wow! Hmmm, how to represent a pending but perhaps never (ghostly?) obligation to a possibly changing group of others. Think, think, think. I will get my Winnie the Pooh hat out and cogitate on that one. ;-) Hope you are having a great day! Patrick On 02/27/2017 04:21 PM, Scott McGrath wrote: I (not the TC expert) believe that YES a commitment to license is made by your participation in or contribution to a TC, BUT that commitment is not fulfilled unless and until the Specification ballot passes.  That could mean a lag of weeks, or months before something that is visible can't be legally used.  And the case of some TCs, that lag becomes forever.  On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 4:11 PM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Scott, Thanks! OK, but isn't there a separate obligation to commit when a contribution is made? ***** 9.2 A TC Party has a Participation Obligation to license or provide under non-assertion covenant as appropriate for the IPR mode, as described in Section 10, any claims under its patents or patent applications that would be Essential Claims in the then current OASIS Standards Draft Deliverable, if that draft subsequently becomes an OASIS Standards Final Deliverable, even if the TC Party is not a Contributor, when all of the following conditions are met: ***** That is upon contribution there is an obligation on the contributor and then, separately, there is an IPR protection upon becoming a Final Deliverable? Not sure how I would capture that in the graphic but concede your point about the separate IPR protection as well. Suggestions? Thanks again! Hope you are having a great week! Patrick On 02/27/2017 12:40 PM, Scott McGrath wrote: FWIW,  I understand Patrick' intent is to: ... to illustrate the binding of IPR or license at the inception of a TC or Project and that as I understood it, there is no magic moment when the IPR or license becomes something else. But, I think this graphic fails to represent what I think is a fundamental difference between standards and OS work: when is the IPR/License commitment available to potential implementers. While TC making Standards commit to an IPR Mode at its inception - the IPR protection is not available to implementers until Specification is voted.  This compares to OS Projects outputs for which the OS License is available the moment the contribution/commit is done.  I think this time to availability contributes to the perception that standards are too slow . Scott...  On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 10:00 PM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Jacques, I'm not tied to project specification but that is what I heard the term was for after multiple releases, the equivalent to a committee specification was going to be called. I may have mis-heard/understood. I'm not at all sure what the parts of a project, code, documentation (I would call that part a specification), binaries, etc. are going to be called. The purpose of the graphic was to illustrate the binding of IPR or license at the inception of a TC or Project and that as I understood it, there is no magic moment when the IPR or license becomes something else. For example, if you use the Apache 2.0 license, how does that interact with the general OASIS copyright on the text of an Oasis Standard? Which I understand cannot be forked under the Oasis copyright? But can be under an Apache 2.0 license. If anything, I think there are a number of naming, parts, what applies to them to be teased out. Suggestions on what artifacts could be produced by a TC or project? Thinking a list of those down one side and the IPR or License across the top might be a useful tool. Not for staking a claim to any answer but to look for places where there is none and/or differing opinions on the answer. Hope you have started a great weekend! Patrick On 02/24/2017 09:46 PM, JDurand@us.fujitsu.com wrote: Terminology discomfort: (a)     Isn’t “Project specification” misleading ? it suggests that this is just the initial design of a “project” – its “specs”. A Project specification is just a part of an open source project, in people’s mind. (b)     We may want the term “Project” to apply to the entire [multipart] work product, not just to the OSS part. I believe there was a proposed renaming of TC, as Project Committee? or Project team? (c)     The project has a specification part(s), and a software (or implementation? Or executable?) part.   Food for thought… -jacques   From: tab@lists.oasis-open.org [ mailto:tab@lists.oasis-open.o rg ] On Behalf Of Patrick Durusau Sent: Friday, February 24, 2017 2:22 PM To: tab@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [tab] After sleeping on IP flow diagram   OK, see how this works. I put the irrevocable note in between TC and Project. Hope everyone is starting a great weekend! Patrick   On 02/24/2017 02:38 PM, Chet Ensign wrote: I agree.   On Feb 24, 2017 2:25 PM, Ashok Malhotra < malhotrasahib@gmail.com > wrote: I think eliminating the words after the first arrow and adding the comment should do it. Ashok   On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 1:15 PM Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Ashok, Good point. I was thinking it emphasizes the same model persists to the end. Perhaps eliminating the words after the first arrow and a comment that initial choices are irrevocable for the life of the TC or project? Thanks! Hope you are looking forward to a great weekend! Patrick   On 02/24/2017 02:01 PM, Ashok Malhotra wrote: From the diagram it looks like you can change the  IPR terms after every step.  This is misleading. Perhaps eliminate the words in the arrows after the first stage. Ashok   On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 10:36 AM Chet Ensign < chet.ensign@oasis-open.org > wrote: You are correct. The TC is committed to the IPR mode from the start. I was thinking about when the license locks in for the work. In an open project, the license applies from the moment someone submits something to the project. On the TC Process, the IPR mode applies in a limited way for TC members during development. Then, once the CSD is approved as a Committee Specification, the IPR obligations lock in and apply to any conforming implementation.        On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Chet, Thanks! One comment/question below:   On 02/24/2017 11:12 AM, Chet Ensign wrote: I like the diagram & I'm going to share it with the staff. It is a very simple graphic that would have eliminated a lot of head scratching had we put it this way earlier.    Not sure about copyright and trademark on the OASIS side but it probably wouldn't hurt to incorporate it somehow.    The other change that might be useful would be to color code the blocks and arrows in some way to show when the licensing locks in. Basically, TC and Committee draft would be a different color since the license terms aren't locked in until CS.    Err, depends on what you mean by lock. I though once a TC chooses an IPR mode, that can't be changed. Yes? Or No? From the IPR Guidelines: A TC may not change its IPR Mode without closing and submitting a new charter. While it is true that patent obligations vest/bind/etc/ at CS, that's not the same as the IPR of the TC. Yes? Perhaps the IPR mode binds from the outset but the scope of the patent rights (and by implication your contribution to it) is set at the issuance of a CS. If anyone thinks that is a helpful distinction, color might be a way to indicate that but may be too subtle for the purpose of this diagram. Could have another diagram that has more details, the copyright, patents and trademark broken out for each one. Hope you are having a great day! Patrick But let's see what people think first.    /chet     On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Greetings! After sleeping on the IP flow diagram it occurred to me that I omitted the copyright on OASIS text and the OASIS trademark references under the traditional OASIS TC IPR modes. Those are governed separately from IPR, the focus of this diagram, hence the oversight. Question: Is that too obvious to need mentioning separately on the far left under OASIS IPR Policy, which is a hyperlink to the four traditional modes? OASIS copyright on work products appears to be defined by Section 14 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/pol icies-guidelines/ipr#notices . I say appears to be because there may be other provisions that govern as well and I have not made an exhaustive search. OASIS trademark(s) appear to be defined by Section 5.3 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/pol icies-guidelines/ipr#s5.3 Taken as a whole, the OASIS IPR document covers patents, copyright and trademarks. From my reading of the various other license choices, I see gaps in their coverage and/or possible undefined relationships, such as with OASIS copyright. I'm not suggesting any resolution or position with this diagram. It is an attempt to tease out issues others will have to resolve. BTW, blame Chet for this graphic as he requested I put my mis-understanding of the process into graphical form. ;-) Hope everyone is having a great week! Patrick -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau   -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393   -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)   Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau   -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393   -- All the best, Ashok -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)   Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- All the best, Ashok -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)   Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau This e-mail and any attached files are only for the use of its intended recipient(s). Its contents are confidential and may be privileged. Fujitsu does not guarantee that this e-mail has not been intercepted and amended or that it is virus free. If you have received this e-mail and are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by e-mail and destroy all copies of this e-mail and any attachments. / Le présent courriel, ainsi que ses pièces jointes, ne peut être utilisé que par le ou les destinataires auxquels il a été transmis. Les renseignements qu'il contient sont confidentiels, voire même protégés. Fujitsu ne peut garantir que ce courriel n'a pas été intercepté ou modifié, ou qu'il ne contient aucun virus. Si vous avez reçu ce courriel sans en être le destinataire prévu, veuillez communiquer par courriel avec son expéditeur et en détruire toutes les copies et pièces jointes. -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- Scott McGrath COO scott.mcgrath@oasis-open.org Tel +1 781-425-5073 x202 Fax +1 781-425-5072 Follow OASIS on: LinkedIn:     http://linkd.in/OASISopen Twitter:         http://twitter.com/OASISopen Facebook:   http://facebook.com/oasis. open -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- Scott McGrath COO scott.mcgrath@oasis-open.org Tel +1 781-425-5073 x202 Fax +1 781-425-5072 Follow OASIS on: LinkedIn:     http://linkd.in/OASISopen Twitter:         http://twitter.com/OASISopen Facebook:   http://facebook.com/oasis.open -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau Attachment: signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Yes.  Now you know why Christopher Robin became an Open Source aficionado.  On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 4:29 PM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Oh wow! Hmmm, how to represent a pending but perhaps never (ghostly?) obligation to a possibly changing group of others. Think, think, think. I will get my Winnie the Pooh hat out and cogitate on that one. ;-) Hope you are having a great day! Patrick On 02/27/2017 04:21 PM, Scott McGrath wrote: I (not the TC expert) believe that YES a commitment to license is made by your participation in or contribution to a TC, BUT that commitment is not fulfilled unless and until the Specification ballot passes.  That could mean a lag of weeks, or months before something that is visible can't be legally used.  And the case of some TCs, that lag becomes forever.  On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 4:11 PM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Scott, Thanks! OK, but isn't there a separate obligation to commit when a contribution is made? ***** 9.2 A TC Party has a Participation Obligation to license or provide under non-assertion covenant as appropriate for the IPR mode, as described in Section 10, any claims under its patents or patent applications that would be Essential Claims in the then current OASIS Standards Draft Deliverable, if that draft subsequently becomes an OASIS Standards Final Deliverable, even if the TC Party is not a Contributor, when all of the following conditions are met: ***** That is upon contribution there is an obligation on the contributor and then, separately, there is an IPR protection upon becoming a "Final Deliverable?" Not sure how I would capture that in the graphic but concede your point about the separate IPR protection as well. Suggestions? Thanks again! Hope you are having a great week! Patrick On 02/27/2017 12:40 PM, Scott McGrath wrote: FWIW,  I understand Patrick' intent is to: "... to illustrate the binding of IPR or license at the inception of a TC or Project and that as I understood it, there is no magic moment when the IPR or license becomes something else." But, I think this graphic fails to represent what I think is a fundamental difference between standards and OS work: when is the IPR/License commitment available to potential implementers. While TC making Standards commit to an IPR Mode at its inception - the IPR "protection" is not available to implementers until Specification is voted.  This compares to OS Projects outputs for which the OS License is available the moment the contribution/commit is done.  I think this "time to availability" contributes to the perception that "standards are too slow". Scott...  On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 10:00 PM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Jacques, I'm not tied to "project specification" but that is what I heard the term was for after multiple "releases," the equivalent to a committee specification was going to be called. I may have mis-heard/understood. I'm not at all sure what the parts of a project, code, documentation (I would call that part a specification), binaries, etc. are going to be called. The purpose of the graphic was to illustrate the binding of IPR or license at the inception of a TC or Project and that as I understood it, there is no magic moment when the IPR or license becomes something else. For example, if you use the Apache 2.0 license, how does that interact with the general OASIS copyright on the text of an Oasis Standard? Which I understand cannot be forked under the Oasis copyright? But can be under an Apache 2.0 license. If anything, I think there are a number of naming, parts, what applies to them to be teased out. Suggestions on what "artifacts" could be produced by a TC or project? Thinking a list of those down one side and the IPR or License across the top might be a useful tool. Not for staking a claim to any answer but to look for places where there is none and/or differing opinions on the answer. Hope you have started a great weekend! Patrick On 02/24/2017 09:46 PM, JDurand@us.fujitsu.com wrote: Terminology discomfort: (a)     Isn’t “Project specification” misleading ? it suggests that this is just the initial design of a “project” – its “specs”. A Project specification is just a part of an open source project, in people’s mind. (b)     We may want the term “Project” to apply to the entire [multipart] work product, not just to the OSS part. I believe there was a proposed renaming of TC, as Project Committee? or Project team? (c)     The project has a specification part(s), and a software (or implementation? Or executable?) part.   Food for thought… -jacques   From: tab@lists.oasis-open.org [ mailto:tab@lists.oasis-open.o rg ] On Behalf Of Patrick Durusau Sent: Friday, February 24, 2017 2:22 PM To: tab@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [tab] After sleeping on IP flow diagram   OK, see how this works. I put the irrevocable note in between TC and Project. Hope everyone is starting a great weekend! Patrick   On 02/24/2017 02:38 PM, Chet Ensign wrote: I agree.   On Feb 24, 2017 2:25 PM, "Ashok Malhotra" < malhotrasahib@gmail.com > wrote: I think eliminating the words after the first arrow and adding the comment should do it. Ashok   On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 1:15 PM Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Ashok, Good point. I was thinking it emphasizes the same model persists to the end. Perhaps eliminating the words after the first arrow and a comment that initial choices are irrevocable for the life of the TC or project? Thanks! Hope you are looking forward to a great weekend! Patrick   On 02/24/2017 02:01 PM, Ashok Malhotra wrote: From the diagram it looks like you can change the  IPR terms after every step.  This is misleading. Perhaps eliminate the words in the arrows after the first stage. Ashok   On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 10:36 AM Chet Ensign < chet.ensign@oasis-open.org > wrote: You are correct. The TC is committed to the IPR mode from the start. I was thinking about when the license locks in for the work. In an open project, the license applies from the moment someone submits something to the project. On the TC Process, the IPR mode applies in a limited way for TC members during development. Then, once the CSD is approved as a Committee Specification, the IPR obligations lock in and apply to any conforming implementation.        On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Chet, Thanks! One comment/question below:   On 02/24/2017 11:12 AM, Chet Ensign wrote: I like the diagram & I'm going to share it with the staff. It is a very simple graphic that would have eliminated a lot of head scratching had we put it this way earlier.    Not sure about copyright and trademark on the OASIS side but it probably wouldn't hurt to incorporate it somehow.    The other change that might be useful would be to color code the blocks and arrows in some way to show when the licensing locks in. Basically, TC and Committee draft would be a different color since the license terms aren't locked in until CS.    Err, depends on what you mean by "lock." I though once a TC chooses an IPR mode, that can't be changed. Yes? Or No? From the IPR Guidelines: "A TC may not change its IPR Mode without closing and submitting a new charter." While it is true that patent obligations "vest/bind/etc/" at CS, that's not the same as the IPR of the TC. Yes? Perhaps the IPR mode binds from the outset but the scope of the patent rights (and by implication your contribution to it) is set at the issuance of a CS. If anyone thinks that is a helpful distinction, color might be a way to indicate that but may be too subtle for the purpose of this diagram. Could have another diagram that has more details, the copyright, patents and trademark broken out for each one. Hope you are having a great day! Patrick But let's see what people think first.    /chet     On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Greetings! After sleeping on the IP flow diagram it occurred to me that I omitted the copyright on OASIS text and the OASIS trademark references under the traditional OASIS TC IPR modes. Those are governed separately from IPR, the focus of this diagram, hence the oversight. Question: Is that too obvious to need mentioning separately on the far left under OASIS IPR Policy, which is a hyperlink to the four traditional modes? OASIS copyright on work products appears to be defined by Section 14 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/pol icies-guidelines/ipr#notices . I say "appears to be" because there may be other provisions that govern as well and I have not made an exhaustive search. OASIS trademark(s) appear to be defined by Section 5.3 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/pol icies-guidelines/ipr#s5.3 Taken as a whole, the OASIS IPR document covers patents, copyright and trademarks. From my reading of the various other license choices, I see gaps in their coverage and/or possible undefined relationships, such as with OASIS copyright. I'm not suggesting any resolution or position with this diagram. It is an attempt to tease out issues others will have to resolve. BTW, blame Chet for this graphic as he requested I put my mis-understanding of the process into graphical form. ;-) Hope everyone is having a great week! Patrick -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau   -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393   -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)   Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau   -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393   -- All the best, Ashok -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)   Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- All the best, Ashok -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)   Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau This e-mail and any attached files are only for the use of its intended recipient(s). Its contents are confidential and may be privileged. Fujitsu does not guarantee that this e-mail has not been intercepted and amended or that it is virus free. If you have received this e-mail and are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by e-mail and destroy all copies of this e-mail and any attachments. / Le présent courriel, ainsi que ses pièces jointes, ne peut être utilisé que par le ou les destinataires auxquels il a été transmis. Les renseignements qu'il contient sont confidentiels, voire même protégés. Fujitsu ne peut garantir que ce courriel n'a pas été intercepté ou modifié, ou qu'il ne contient aucun virus. Si vous avez reçu ce courriel sans en être le destinataire prévu, veuillez communiquer par courriel avec son expéditeur et en détruire toutes les copies et pièces jointes. -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- Scott McGrath COO scott.mcgrath@oasis-open.org Tel +1 781-425-5073 x202 Fax +1 781-425-5072 Follow OASIS on: LinkedIn:     http://linkd.in/OASISopen Twitter:         http://twitter.com/OASISopen Facebook:   http://facebook.com/oasis.ope n -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- Scott McGrath COO scott.mcgrath@oasis-open.org Tel +1 781-425-5073 x202 Fax +1 781-425-5072 Follow OASIS on: LinkedIn:     http://linkd.in/OASISopen Twitter:         http://twitter.com/OASISopen Facebook:   http://facebook.com/oasis. open -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- Scott McGrath COO scott.mcgrath@oasis-open.org Tel +1 781-425-5073 x202 Fax +1 781-425-5072 Follow OASIS on: LinkedIn:     http://linkd.in/OASISopen Twitter:         http://twitter.com/OASISopen Facebook:   http://facebook.com/oasis.open

Hi there and yes, it is that lock in that is a key differentiator. The submitter to an open source project says "here is something I would like the project team to incorporate into the code - and I've signed the CLA so you are free to use it right now." The person joining a TC (and, for organizations, the organization when the Primary Rep approves their participation) says "we want to be involved in this and we make the commitment to honor our IPR obligations *when the work becomes a Committee Specification*." And indeed, there is work in docs.oasis-open.org that never got to CS01 and so implementers of the CSPRDs wouldn't have the protection.  Patrick does make another interesting wrinkle with the observation that we may have to think about the copyright conflicts. A Project Specification (Jacques, that's what we have landed on for now as the thing that will be the equivalent of a Committee Specification) may need a different Notices page from a TC's CS.  /chet p.s. - I don't know that there's much to be gained from trying to add that to the diagram. But the diagram has done us a service by getting us thinking about it.  On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 4:21 PM, Scott McGrath < scott.mcgrath@oasis-open.org > wrote: I (not the TC expert) believe that YES a commitment to license is made by your participation in or contribution to a TC, BUT that commitment is not fulfilled unless and until the Specification ballot passes.  That could mean a lag of weeks, or months before something that is visible can't be legally used.  And the case of some TCs, that lag becomes forever.  On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 4:11 PM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Scott, Thanks! OK, but isn't there a separate obligation to commit when a contribution is made? ***** 9.2 A TC Party has a Participation Obligation to license or provide under non-assertion covenant as appropriate for the IPR mode, as described in Section 10, any claims under its patents or patent applications that would be Essential Claims in the then current OASIS Standards Draft Deliverable, if that draft subsequently becomes an OASIS Standards Final Deliverable, even if the TC Party is not a Contributor, when all of the following conditions are met: ***** That is upon contribution there is an obligation on the contributor and then, separately, there is an IPR protection upon becoming a "Final Deliverable?" Not sure how I would capture that in the graphic but concede your point about the separate IPR protection as well. Suggestions? Thanks again! Hope you are having a great week! Patrick On 02/27/2017 12:40 PM, Scott McGrath wrote: FWIW,  I understand Patrick' intent is to: "... to illustrate the binding of IPR or license at the inception of a TC or Project and that as I understood it, there is no magic moment when the IPR or license becomes something else." But, I think this graphic fails to represent what I think is a fundamental difference between standards and OS work: when is the IPR/License commitment available to potential implementers. While TC making Standards commit to an IPR Mode at its inception - the IPR "protection" is not available to implementers until Specification is voted.  This compares to OS Projects outputs for which the OS License is available the moment the contribution/commit is done.  I think this "time to availability" contributes to the perception that "standards are too slow". Scott...  On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 10:00 PM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Jacques, I'm not tied to "project specification" but that is what I heard the term was for after multiple "releases," the equivalent to a committee specification was going to be called. I may have mis-heard/understood. I'm not at all sure what the parts of a project, code, documentation (I would call that part a specification), binaries, etc. are going to be called. The purpose of the graphic was to illustrate the binding of IPR or license at the inception of a TC or Project and that as I understood it, there is no magic moment when the IPR or license becomes something else. For example, if you use the Apache 2.0 license, how does that interact with the general OASIS copyright on the text of an Oasis Standard? Which I understand cannot be forked under the Oasis copyright? But can be under an Apache 2.0 license. If anything, I think there are a number of naming, parts, what applies to them to be teased out. Suggestions on what "artifacts" could be produced by a TC or project? Thinking a list of those down one side and the IPR or License across the top might be a useful tool. Not for staking a claim to any answer but to look for places where there is none and/or differing opinions on the answer. Hope you have started a great weekend! Patrick On 02/24/2017 09:46 PM, JDurand@us.fujitsu.com wrote: Terminology discomfort: (a)     Isn’t “Project specification” misleading ? it suggests that this is just the initial design of a “project” – its “specs”. A Project specification is just a part of an open source project, in people’s mind. (b)     We may want the term “Project” to apply to the entire [multipart] work product, not just to the OSS part. I believe there was a proposed renaming of TC, as Project Committee? or Project team? (c)     The project has a specification part(s), and a software (or implementation? Or executable?) part.   Food for thought… -jacques   From: tab@lists.oasis-open.org [ mailto:tab@lists.oasis-open.o rg ] On Behalf Of Patrick Durusau Sent: Friday, February 24, 2017 2:22 PM To: tab@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [tab] After sleeping on IP flow diagram   OK, see how this works. I put the irrevocable note in between TC and Project. Hope everyone is starting a great weekend! Patrick   On 02/24/2017 02:38 PM, Chet Ensign wrote: I agree.   On Feb 24, 2017 2:25 PM, "Ashok Malhotra" < malhotrasahib@gmail.com > wrote: I think eliminating the words after the first arrow and adding the comment should do it. Ashok   On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 1:15 PM Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Ashok, Good point. I was thinking it emphasizes the same model persists to the end. Perhaps eliminating the words after the first arrow and a comment that initial choices are irrevocable for the life of the TC or project? Thanks! Hope you are looking forward to a great weekend! Patrick   On 02/24/2017 02:01 PM, Ashok Malhotra wrote: From the diagram it looks like you can change the  IPR terms after every step.  This is misleading. Perhaps eliminate the words in the arrows after the first stage. Ashok   On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 10:36 AM Chet Ensign < chet.ensign@oasis-open.org > wrote: You are correct. The TC is committed to the IPR mode from the start. I was thinking about when the license locks in for the work. In an open project, the license applies from the moment someone submits something to the project. On the TC Process, the IPR mode applies in a limited way for TC members during development. Then, once the CSD is approved as a Committee Specification, the IPR obligations lock in and apply to any conforming implementation.        On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Chet, Thanks! One comment/question below:   On 02/24/2017 11:12 AM, Chet Ensign wrote: I like the diagram & I'm going to share it with the staff. It is a very simple graphic that would have eliminated a lot of head scratching had we put it this way earlier.    Not sure about copyright and trademark on the OASIS side but it probably wouldn't hurt to incorporate it somehow.    The other change that might be useful would be to color code the blocks and arrows in some way to show when the licensing locks in. Basically, TC and Committee draft would be a different color since the license terms aren't locked in until CS.    Err, depends on what you mean by "lock." I though once a TC chooses an IPR mode, that can't be changed. Yes? Or No? From the IPR Guidelines: "A TC may not change its IPR Mode without closing and submitting a new charter." While it is true that patent obligations "vest/bind/etc/" at CS, that's not the same as the IPR of the TC. Yes? Perhaps the IPR mode binds from the outset but the scope of the patent rights (and by implication your contribution to it) is set at the issuance of a CS. If anyone thinks that is a helpful distinction, color might be a way to indicate that but may be too subtle for the purpose of this diagram. Could have another diagram that has more details, the copyright, patents and trademark broken out for each one. Hope you are having a great day! Patrick But let's see what people think first.    /chet     On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Patrick Durusau < patrick@durusau.net > wrote: Greetings! After sleeping on the IP flow diagram it occurred to me that I omitted the copyright on OASIS text and the OASIS trademark references under the traditional OASIS TC IPR modes. Those are governed separately from IPR, the focus of this diagram, hence the oversight. Question: Is that too obvious to need mentioning separately on the far left under OASIS IPR Policy, which is a hyperlink to the four traditional modes? OASIS copyright on work products appears to be defined by Section 14 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/pol icies-guidelines/ipr#notices . I say "appears to be" because there may be other provisions that govern as well and I have not made an exhaustive search. OASIS trademark(s) appear to be defined by Section 5.3 of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, https://www.oasis-open.org/pol icies-guidelines/ipr#s5.3 Taken as a whole, the OASIS IPR document covers patents, copyright and trademarks. From my reading of the various other license choices, I see gaps in their coverage and/or possible undefined relationships, such as with OASIS copyright. I'm not suggesting any resolution or position with this diagram. It is an attempt to tease out issues others will have to resolve. BTW, blame Chet for this graphic as he requested I put my mis-understanding of the process into graphical form. ;-) Hope everyone is having a great week! Patrick -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau   -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393   -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)   Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau   -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393   -- All the best, Ashok -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)   Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- All the best, Ashok -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)   Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau This e-mail and any attached files are only for the use of its intended recipient(s). Its contents are confidential and may be privileged. Fujitsu does not guarantee that this e-mail has not been intercepted and amended or that it is virus free. If you have received this e-mail and are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by e-mail and destroy all copies of this e-mail and any attachments. / Le présent courriel, ainsi que ses pièces jointes, ne peut être utilisé que par le ou les destinataires auxquels il a été transmis. Les renseignements qu'il contient sont confidentiels, voire même protégés. Fujitsu ne peut garantir que ce courriel n'a pas été intercepté ou modifié, ou qu'il ne contient aucun virus. Si vous avez reçu ce courriel sans en être le destinataire prévu, veuillez communiquer par courriel avec son expéditeur et en détruire toutes les copies et pièces jointes. -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- Scott McGrath COO scott.mcgrath@oasis-open.org Tel +1 781-425-5073 x202 Fax +1 781-425-5072 Follow OASIS on: LinkedIn:     http://linkd.in/OASISopen Twitter:         http://twitter.com/OASISopen Facebook:   http://facebook.com/oasis.ope n -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau -- Scott McGrath COO scott.mcgrath@oasis-open.org Tel +1 781-425-5073 x202 Fax +1 781-425-5072 Follow OASIS on: LinkedIn:     http://linkd.in/OASISopen Twitter:         http://twitter.com/OASISopen Facebook:   http://facebook.com/oasis. open -- /chet  ---------------- Chet Ensign Director of Standards Development and TC Administration  OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society http://www.oasis-open.org Primary: +1 973-996-2298 Mobile: +1 201-341-1393