[OpenID board] [legal] Feedback on latest drafts of OpenIDIPR Policy and Process

Drummond Reed drummond.reed at cordance.net
Wed Nov 28 17:55:06 UTC 2007


+1. I want to make sure that nothing in my comments are construed as
suggesting that we should delay the IPR Policy/Process approval for one
minute. In fact just the opposite - my comments were aimed at items that in
most cases should be relatively easy to fix, and ideally could be
incorporated into a final revision before the OpenID Foundation board call
tomorrow (which is what the OpenID Foundation board agreed to in our last
telecon early this month).

 

I think Dick's suggestion about OpenID community voting on major decisions
is a very interesting one, and one that in spirit I am in favor of, because
it is the most democractic of all. However it will require enough additional
infrastructure (and discussion) that I suggest it be an evolutionary step
that the OIDF and the community take together. I believe that paragraph 5.4
of the current Process document (the amendment paragraph) provides a clean
way for us to take that step when we're ready.

 

By all means, let's not delay this any further. Let's do one final rev of
these docs reflecting this feedback (any other OIDF board member feedback?)
ASAP and publish that for immediate community revie and final approval at
IIW.

 

=Drummond 

 

  _____  

From: legal-bounces at openid.net [mailto:legal-bounces at openid.net] On Behalf
Of Mike Jones
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 9:25 AM
To: Bill Washburn; Dick Hardt; board at openid.net
Cc: David Daggett; David Daggett (Preston Gates & Ellis); legal at openid.net;
Bill Washburn
Subject: Re: [legal] [OpenID board] Feedback on latest drafts of OpenIDIPR
Policy and Process

 

I just spoke with Drummond on the phone.  He's suggesting two very
reasonable process changes:

  - Recognize contributions posted to official working group web sites and
wikis

  - Possibly increase the size of the specs council from 5 to 7

 

He's also interested in being more explicit about the reasons that the board
could decide not to approve things.

 

If the board agrees with those changes, I'm sure that the IPR policy working
group members would also concur.  Thanks for the detailed read, Drummond!

 

I also appreciate Bill's observation below that we're now talking about only
process changes, not changes to the IPR policy itself.

 

                                                Cheers,

                                                -- Mike

 

  _____  

From: legal-bounces at openid.net [mailto:legal-bounces at openid.net] On Behalf
Of Bill Washburn
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 8:09 AM
To: Dick Hardt; board at openid.net
Cc: legal at openid.net; Bill Washburn
Subject: Re: [legal] [OpenID board] Feedback on latest drafts of OpenID IPR
Policy and Process

 

Scott, Dick,

It seems to me this is not being seen / interpreted in exactly the same way
by both of you.  I take the suggestion from Dick as a proposal for how to
ensure that major decisions re Working Groups and such are based on
community input and that therefore such a mechanism ought to be incorporated
into the procedures of the IPR process document.

This proposal that you, Scott, describe as "fantastic" is something about
which you are both in strong agreement.  So far, so good, right?

I think the confusion is that I don't read this suggestion as a change in
the procedure for how we come to closure on the IPR docs right now.  After
all, as of today and until we complete this IPR effort there are in
actuality no members of the OIDF who could vote in the first place.  I take
Dick's proposal as a solid suggestion for how to ensure the strong role of
the OpenID community in the major decisions regarding IPR process and not at
all about how we complete this effort to establish the OpenID IPR policy
regime.

cheers,
-bill

----- Original Message ----
From: Dick Hardt <dick at sxip.com>
To: board at openid.net
Cc: legal at openid.net; Bill Washburn <bill at oidf.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 7:36:10 AM
Subject: Re: [legal] [OpenID board] Feedback on latest drafts of OpenID IPR
Policy and Process


On 28-Nov-07, at 7:19 AM, Scott Kveton wrote:

>>  I agree with Drummond's comments. I have not had time to review the
>> documents, and likely won't until late this week.
>>
>> A suggestion I have around major decisions would be to put them  
>> out for
>> referendum to members of the OIDF. We can use OpenIDs to identity  
>> people and
>> easily to electronic voting. This puts the power clearly in the  
>> hands of the
>> community instead of in the hands of the board or spec council.  
>> Changes to
>> the policy and final approval of specifications and potential  
>> approval of
>> WGs could be done this way. The spec council and board could take  
>> a position
>> and make recommendation, but putting the major decisions in the  
>> hands of the
>> community clearly empowers them and keeps the board and council from
>> becoming an old boys network and leaving the membership feeling  
>> out of the
>> loop.
>
> I think this is a fantastic idea in the long-term but doesn't fit well
> with the goals we've set out as a board to try and adopt the IPR (or
> get as close as possible) by IIW.

Is the goal to rubber stamp the IPR (primarily driven by large  
vendors) or to create an IPR that protects and empowers the  
community, which we as a board represent?

I don't think there is a second chance to do the IPR.

-- Dick



_______________________________________________
legal mailing list
legal at openid.net
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/legal

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-board/attachments/20071128/cd3d2ee8/attachment-0003.htm>


More information about the board mailing list