incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David L Kaminsky <>
Subject Re: Incubator Proposal: SPL
Date Mon, 17 Sep 2007 17:56:00 GMT

Thanks Craig (and Mark).  I'll add the references.


             Craig L Russell                                               
             n.COM>                                                     To 
             Sent by:                  "Mark A. Carlson"                   
             Craig.Russell@Sun         <Mark.Carlson@Sun.COM>              
             .COM                                                       cc 
                             , David 
                                       L Kaminsky/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS, W G   
             09/17/2007 01:53          Stoddard/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS          
             PM                                                    Subject 
                                       Re: Incubator Proposal: SPL         

Hi Mark,

Thanks for that. I also found other documents on the site [1] to be
relevant, in particular the cover page of [2].

I have no further issues with the IP aspect of this proposal, and
suggest that references to [1] and [2] and [3] be included in the
updated proposal to head off future rat-holes.



On Sep 17, 2007, at 10:30 AM, Mark A. Carlson wrote:

> The DMTF patent policy is here:
> The DMTF does not have any IP in any of its specs and
> unless DMTF is explicitly notified of such, neither do any of
> the members.
> -- mark
> Craig L Russell wrote:
>> Hi David,
>> Thanks for the clarifications.
>> On Sep 17, 2007, at 5:57 AM, David L Kaminsky wrote:
>>> On the standard itself, not surprisingly, the DMTF encourages
>>> implementations, and at submission, the DMTF requires this text:
>>> "Permission to copy, display, perform, modify and distribute the
>>> specification, and to authorize others to do the foregoing, in
>>> any medium
>>> without fee or royalty is hereby granted for the purpose of
>>> developing and
>>> evaluating the Specification.
>> But the intended use here is not "developing and evaluating" the
>> Specification, but implementing it. Is there a grant of license
>> for implementations?
>>> The Specification may be published as one or
>>> more separate documents including for example as ASCII formats,
>>> schema or
>>> metadata files rather than solely as a single document.
>>> "Co-Developers agree to grant a license to third parties, under
>>> royalty-free and otherwise reasonable, non-discriminatory terms and
>>> conditions, to their respective Essential Patent Rights (as that
>>> term is
>>> defined in the DMTF Patent and Technology Policy) that are
>>> necessary to
>>> implement the Specification in accordance with the DMTF Patent and
>>> Technology Policy."
>> This required grant of patent rights is a good indicator that
>> implementing the Specification doesn't get Apache into potential
>> trouble, but I'd still like to see an explicit statement regarding
>> the rights of independent implementations to use the IP contained
>> in the Specification itself.
>> Regards,
>> Craig
>> Craig Russell

Craig Russell

  • Unnamed multipart/related (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message