Paola, (01)
You aren't taking my joke about patenting the word "open" seriously, are you? (02)
=ppy (03)
P.S. as mentioned the OOR Initiative is independent of
OntologySummit2008 (and even the [ontolog-forum].) Therefore, please
take your OOR-Initiative-related issues up with me, Leo or Mike
off-line. Thanks. =ppy
-- (04)
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 8:42 PM, <paola.dimaio@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Greetings all
>
> It was a pleasure to finally meet everybody at the Summit, and thanks
> again for efforts being put up. The forum is a great resource for all
> of us, and as the community grows it is important that 'active
> community members' take more responsiblity for its development.
> I hope it continues to stay that way.
>
> I was surprised to learn today about an 'open ontology founders
> meeting' which took place in January
>
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OOR/ConferenceCall_2008_01_23#nid17D9
>
> because I found no reference in my inbox nor in the list archives, to
> any invitation to participate in such meeting.
> Can someone point me to any announcement about that meeting (before it
> took place?)
>
> Specifically on that wiki page, ther is a reference to some not better
> specified IPR being reserved, but no acknowledgment of prior
> work and existing IPR, which is in contradiction of some of the
> principles of our community and forum, and could possibly cause
> conflict
>
> Being an early proponent of 'Open Ontology', both in terms of wording
> and concepts (I have published papers on this forum and elsewhere
> about this work) and having already extracted a set of metadata from
> the framework, which our metadata champion Michael did not know of,
> (while the rest of this community did, as we discussed it extensively
> on this list) I was particularly surprised to learn that the
> participants to the 2008 summit have not been informed of the pre
> existing , and prior work under the same heading, and related
> pre-existing IPR.
>
> Issues such as 'ownership' and control of 'open ontology' concept and
> derived artifacts should be addressed, before they can be claimed and
> trademarked by related parties.
>
> I would thefore encourage clarification as required, as well as
> acnkowledgment of prior IPR, in order to avoid potential conflicts,
> and some information relating to such new lists where the OOR work is
> being discussed where we can cross reference the contributions made to
> date, so that they can be duly acknowledged by the body of knowledge
> which is being generated.
>
> I would encourage such issues to be addressed and clarified before the
> communique issued, as some of the statements therein contained may
> constitue an infringement of existing copyright, and this forum
> brought up to date on the new OOR list (where to join?) and other
> developments
>
> I look forward to developments
>
> --
> Paola Di Maio
> School of IT
> www.mfu.ac.th
> *********************************************
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
> Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2008/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2008
> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/
> (05)
_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2008/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2008
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/ (06)
|