[OpenID board] [legal] Feedback on latest drafts of OpenID IPR Policy and Process
dick at sxip.com
Mon Dec 3 06:13:20 UTC 2007
I have written a longer post on where I think the IPR Process and
Policy should go. Below is a summary of the two core issues I have
with the current policy and process:
Breadth of NAA coverage
The objective in having Contributors execute a NAA to participate in
a WG is so that the Contributor does not lead the group down the
garden path of a patent that an evil Contributor has and then
surprise everyone at the end. Given that some people are evil and
would like to play this game, we have just changed the means by which
the game is played. They can't be a contributor, but they can be part
of the OpenID Community, implement OpenID specifications and still
make infringement claims against implementors of an OpenID
specification they did not contribute to.
I strongly think we want ALL members of the OpenID Community to make
non-assert promises, not just the contributors. If someone does not
want to make a non-assert about a particular specification, that
should be a wake up call around the IP on that specification, and I
would suggest we NOT publish a specification as an OpenID
specification if there is any reason to believe the specification is
encumbered. It is not the right thing to do to promote a
specification that is suspected will cause implementors IP issues in
Elite vs Community
The direction of the specifications council of being representation
vs full meritocracy is in the wrong direction from my point of view.
The Board and the Specs council should serve at the pleasure of the
Community. Being elected by the community does not mean the Board or
council are representing the Communities interest. So much can happen
in two years, that OpenID can be in a completely different direction
by the time a new set of elections happen.
I think a specications council that assists members in created WG
charters and in preparing for specifactions to go final makes sense.
Their role is to impart their wisdom and smooth the process -- not
decide the result.
I strongly feel the power should be with the Community, not the
Board, and not the Specifications Council. The Community should
decide on starting WGs, finalization of Specifications and changes to
the process and policy.
More information about the board