OpenID 2.0 finalization progress
Johannes Ernst
jernst+openid.net at netmesh.us
Fri Oct 19 23:12:01 UTC 2007
Some years ago, if I recall correctly, Rambus participated in an open
industry process (or so the other participants thought) to define
certain memory communications protocols, and after they had produced
a spec, Rambus said "but we have some patents". This lead to at least
one lawsuit I believe.
I have heard wildly diverging assessments on whether or not this
could happen here. The way to move forward is to put the IPR policy
in place prior to declaring any new specs final; fortunately we are
very close on the IPR policy.
I strongly suggest that whoever feels the urgency to get a 2.0 spec
declared final to help out driving the IPR process to a close. That's
on the critical path, and that's where all energies should be directed.
On Oct 19, 2007, at 12:23, Kevin Turner wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-10-19 at 10:02 -0700, Paul C. Bryan wrote:
>> On Thu, 2007-10-18 at 19:13 -0700, Dick Hardt wrote:
>>
>>> I don't see why the two processes need to be any more dependant on
>>> each other then they are already.
>>
>> With all due respect, why take the risk that there are intellectual
>> property issues after the specification is finalized?
>
> I'll let my ignorance show here: How will any potential IPR issues
> affect the final specification? I recognize that many parties require
> the IPR documentation before moving forward with their adoption of
> OpenID. However, there are many parties who do _not_ feel that need,
> and I do not understand what the downside is to calling the
> specification final now. Are we waiting on the results of a patent
> search which might necessitate re-working parts of the protocol? What
> exactly are the consequences, worst case, in calling the specification
> "final" before the IPR is sealed?
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> specs mailing list
> specs at openid.net
> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs
More information about the specs
mailing list