HI Rex and all
I am waiting for clarification and questions from Peter when he gets back
I dont have time to repeat the questions! have already sent link to
all the materials reference in my claim, working on lots of other
stuff (01)
1) OOR 'founders' meeting was called in january, but I have seen no
public nor private invitation to such a meeting (nowhere I could make
a contribution based on my prior work on this list and elsewhere (open
ontology thread and papers). But I may have missed that
Please point me to the public invitation made by this list to make
contributions to OOR and to participate in the 'founders meeting', I
would like to know why I am not listed as a founder, despite the fact
that I started 'open ontolgy' discussion on this forum on the topic (02)
else, please point me to discussions on this forum that preceded my
thread on 'open ontology' and oor, thanks (03)
2) when discussing OOR questions, I have been told that this is not
the list to dicuss them, (but another list) despite the fact that OO,
and the derived OOR discussions, generated on the public ontolog list,
and the summit . I have already sent a link to a page where OOR ipr
seems to be 'pending' (not the same as the list) . please clarify that
statement. (04)
a few other points can be made unless the nature of my complaint
becomes obvious and rectified (lets not waste time on these silly
things) (05)
Peter, I am not accusing you of anything! I am just pointing out
conflicts in some of the statements over IPR of this list, and
contradictions on the processes, especially where they should be open
but for some reason they are not (06)
I have been paying closed attention to both ontolog activity and
development in open ontology
and I am very intersted to participate in the effort, provided I am
given the opportunity to do so
:-) (07)
PDM (08)
On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 9:57 PM, Rex Brooks <rexb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Paola,
>
> I'm little bit at a loss over what the issue is here. Having worked with
> Peter for several years, I have to say that he is the single most insistent
> individual I've ever run into with regard to scrupulously insisting on IPR
> that guarantees "openness" in the open-source mold. In fact, I have found
> some of these policies too restrictive for some of my associates who insist
> on not contributing any of their work unless or until they can clearly
> establish that such contributions are clearly their own copyrighted work
> because inclusion in a publicly available and "open" resource such as the
> various forums Peter supplies at his own cost, could (in their opinion)
> compromise their copyright by making it viewable.
>
> Without an IPR policy that protects contributions by placing them under an
> OPEN "Free Software" or "Open Source" (GNU-type) License, any contributions
> not so protected or for which a formal copyright has not already been
> obtained at the personal cost of the contributor, all such contributions are
> easily stolen with no chance for redress. Most mailing lists either provide
> an IPR policy or else post a disclaimer that any contributions are the
> responsibility of the contributor, essentially disclaiming any
> responsibility to protect contributors from unattributed and/or unauthorized
> use of their intellectual property. If you check the references linked in
> the IPR statement you can get more thorough information, but this approach
> protects contributions from being hijacked for the purpose of establishing
> patents or copyrights which can then be enforced, requiring royalty
> payments. However, contributors must be aware that anyone can use their
> contributions and build applications that are then offered commercially as
> long as they cite the copyright.
>
> For my purposes, which are largely non-commercial when I participate in
> Peter's mailing lists or fora, his policies are a benefit because such
> participation is not vulnerable to IPR "poachers" which I can assure you are
> out there just waiting. I have run afoul of this before in my own life on
> other lists Also, I trust that Peter is dedicated to preventing such
> vulnerability and is not himself advancing any private agenda.
>
> I suspect that this is a misunderstanding, which I hope can be successfully
> resolved soon.
>
> Cheers,
> Rex
>
>
>
> At 3:52 PM -0400 5/2/08, paola.dimaio@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> > Deborah
> >
> > all contributions to the Ontolog community todate, are under the
> > existing copyright policty, which includes 'right of attribution' -
> > this means nobody can extrapolate knowlege propagated via the list
> > withouth duly referencing its source.
> >
> > This include all discussions, papers and wiki entries relating to Open
> > Ontology, (from which the OOR stuff is derived) and Ontology Metadata,
> > for example (of which, incidentally I am the author)
> >
> > Even if the names of the topics are shuffled around a bit, and the
> > content of the contribution is desperately being y morphed and
> > exploded into bigger picture using awkward linguisting convolutions,
> > it is obvious that the OOR discussions, and derived artifaces,
> > currently being discussed in a privale list, under a separate IPR
> > policy, to be
> > decided, originated from those entries done on the list and on the
> > wiki, and reference existing copyrighted work (stuff that is not on
> > the ontolog list)
> >
> > So while lack of reference in subsequent developments of this research
> > area is unethical (and puzzling) it is also a copyright infringement
> > (right of attribution). of pre- existing IPR
> >
> > So I am afraid ' to be specified soon' implies, by law, in
> > accordance to existing IPR policies of the forum where the IPR was
> > generated in the first place
> >
> > etc etc etc
> >
> > pdm
> >
> > IOn Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 10:46 AM, Deborah MacPherson <debmacp@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> >
> > > I have in my notes here that the OOR was to be licensed under Creative
> > >
> > > Commons or opensource.org policy to be specified soon.
> >
> > >
> > > Also, the last talk yesterday, includes an overview of MANY policies
> > > especially seen final portion by Mike Dean.
> > >
> > > Best Regards,
> > >
> > > Deborah
> > >
> > >
> > > 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/
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > 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/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Paola Di Maio
> > School of IT
> > www.mfu.ac.th
> > *********************************************
> >
>
>
> --
> Rex Brooks
> President, CEO
> Starbourne Communications Design
> GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
> Berkeley, CA 94702
> Tel: 510-898-0670
> (09)
--
Paola Di Maio
School of IT
www.mfu.ac.th
********************************************* (010)
_________________________________________________________________
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/ (011)
|