Hi Peter,
Yes, I do remember our conversations and I’m aware of Ontolog’s posted policies. Thanks for the reminders and the links. I'll certainly go through them, again, just to be sure of terms.
Please know that, like many other participating CIM members, I’m very careful and go out of my way to “not" post anything that is considered proprietary to the enterprises I represent or any other organization, for that matter. And, I recognize that what I do discuss openly, in this or any other community, is a matter of open conversation. I do my best to be very careful in separating anything that could be considered legal intellectual capital from general conversation.
Also, I’m sure you're fully aware that referenced citations, quotes, and links to materials and examples which originate and exist offsite and that are not already original works of CIM do not, by law, constitute original works of CIM, even if CIM’s documented policies were to state otherwise (which I don’t believe they do).
As for the IF4IT's published definition of “open” and how it pertains to Foundation published open material, in short, “open" means that people and enterprises can use the material for “themselves" but simply cannot interpret our brands or our works as their own nor can they directly profit from them without explicit consent from the IF4IT. We go out of our way to separate what is “open” from what is “for profit."
Please know that when I publish links to to things like visual examples, I know and am very clear on the fact that the visual representation of those examples are not considered intellectual capital because, by law, no one can claim “Look and Feel” to be intellectual capital, as per law suits such as Apple vs. Microsoft. And, if people wish to copy such look and feel, I wish them the best in doing so and I’m even happy to help them do so, when I can, as we publish visualization source code to the open source community via GitHub (we use d3js.org).
If there’s any concern or ambiguity, please always feel free to reach out and ask, as I will always do my best to help. In the mean time, please know that I truly appreciate the Ontolog community and its members and that I will share whatever I can (although, I find that there are far smarter people than me in this community).
My Best,
Frank
--
Frank Guerino, Chairman
The International Foundation for Information Technology (IF4IT)
http://www.if4it.com
1.908.294.5191 (M)
Hello Frank,
I believe we had communicated about this before (ref. some of the offline exchange we had around that time) ...
I just looked through your "Terms of Use"[1] quickly, and can conclude that your "Open and Sanctioned Use Policy" is neither "Open" (as in the "Open Source Definition"[2], nor "Free" (as in the "Free Software Definition[3]"), nor is that consistent with either the OpenContent License:OPL-1.0[4] or the Creative Commons CC-BY-SA-3.0 (Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0) License[5].
I assume you are fully aware of the ONTOLOG contribution policy[6], and by posting about your work and inviting contributions to it here, you may nullify your own licensing restrictions or, at the least, breach our Ontolog Open IPR Policy.
Please, again, review our (Ontolog members') Contribution Guidelines and Policy[0], and in particular, our Open IPR Policy[6], and ensure your posts are consistent with them.
Ref.
Thanks & regards. =ppy --
|