[Top] [All Lists]

[oor-forum] Fwd: [ontology-summit] escalating IPR issues

To: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>, OpenOntologyRepository-discussion <oor-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Peter Yim" <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 8 May 2008 06:32:51 -0700
Message-id: <af8f58ac0805080632h33ba20aesc00f4cfa6a0bee48@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Thank you very much for the advice, John.    (01)

I am forwarding this to the [oor-forum] and will make sure these
suggestions are considered when it comes time for the OOR folks to set
their IPR policies.    (02)

Thanks & regards.  =ppy
--    (03)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: John F. Sowa <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, May 8, 2008 at 5:47 AM
Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] escalating IPR issues
To: Ontology Summit 2008 <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>    (04)

Peter and Paola,    (05)

 PY> ... the need for more specific IPR Policy for OOR
  > is  because OOR is a working group with a specific    (06)

 > agenda toward implementation (unlike Ontolog, a CoP,
  > or the OntologySummit2008, which focuses on the
  > intellectual discourse around a specific topic).    (07)

 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.    (08)

 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.    (09)

 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.    (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)

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/oor-forum/  
Subscribe: mailto:oor-forum-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
Config/Unsubscribe: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/oor-forum/  
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OOR/ 
Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OpenOntologyRepository     (012)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [oor-forum] Fwd: [ontology-summit] escalating IPR issues, Peter Yim <=