Peter and Paola, (01)
PY> ... the need for more specific IPR Policy for OOR
> is because OOR is a working group with a specific
> agenda toward implementation (unlike Ontolog, a CoP,
> or the OntologySummit2008, which focuses on the
> intellectual discourse around a specific topic). (02)
The crucial consideration for IP rights is to clarify
patent ownership. Every IT standards group has explicit
policies on that point. For ISO, it's very clear: any
working paper that any expert or member contributes to
a working group grants ISO the right to use that material
in any way that any working group desires. Any prior
patent or copyright encumbrances must be clearly identified. (03)
Any citation used in the standards process is always to
a working document #xxxxx, and *never* credited to any
individual by name. Document #xxxxx might have the name
of the author(s) who wrote it, but those people are *never*
credited with their contribution in any standard document
that may be produced. A standard might have a list of
published references, usually other standards, but they
never cite working documents. (04)
There are people on this list who know much more about
ISO policies than I do, and they could point to the exact
wording. I suggest that we adopt one of the policies used
by ISO or some similar organization. (05)
PDM> the fact that you may have not been aware of prior
> contributions to this topic, may be due to the fact that
> despite making a firm case for requirements on this list,
> I never heard that you were working on requirements because
> these were not discussed on this list (06)
The requirements for citations are very simple: *ZERO*. (07)
Anything that anybody says on a wiki or an open email
forum is given away as a free donation to the world.
Nobody has any obligation to cite the source, and a
citation is always a courtesy, not a requirement. (08)
I realize that academic participants need to have
a respectable list of publications for tenure and
promotion. But no academic committee gives any
credit to emails, and I don't believe they should. (09)
Furthermore, most academic committees don't give any
credit for participation on standards committees,
although they might consider that as a plus under
the classification of "other professional activity". (010)
Those are the facts of academic life, and the OOR is
not the proper place to argue for a change in academic
policy. (011)
John (012)
_________________________________________________________________
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/ (013)
|