[OpenID] OpenID 2.0 is final

[Pat Patterson]

Wow - the lawyers got to Peter mid-sentence. Watch your backs, folks!

On Dec 7, 2007, at 9:00 AM, Peter Williams wrote:

> This is not the way the
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Johannes Ernst <jernst+openid.net at netmesh.us>
> Sent: Friday, December 07, 2007 1:05 AM
> To: general at openid.net <general at openid.net>
> Cc: Peter Williams <pwilliams at rapattoni.com>
> Subject: Re: [OpenID] OpenID 2.0 is final
>
> Actually, I think it is worse ;-) I have yet to see a lawyer who would
> say "this piece of code does not violate any IP" because it's
> basically impossible given the number of patents there is, the much
> larger number of patent interpretations that there are and might be,
> and the number of jurisdictions in which those might have been filed
> by parties nobody has ever heard of.
>
> The best defense here is in numbers. Which means:
>
> **
> If you have not signed a non-assert but can easily do so, PLEASE DO
> and send it to the OpenID Foundation.
> The more billions you have on your balance sheet, the better ;-)
> **
> Further say that you will do all sorts of nasty things to those people
> who are playing patent troll on published OpenID specifications.
>
> That's the real deterrent.
>
>
>
> On Dec 6, 2007, at 19:16, David Recordon wrote:
>
>> I doubt that companies would share this knowledge if that have done
>> so.  What we've been working on within the Foundation is the ability
>> for Contributors (and others) to issues non-assertion agreements
>> around their IP and OpenID specifications.
>>
>> --David
>>
>> On Dec 6, 2007, at 11:52 AM, Peter Williams wrote:
>>
>>> Let me ask the question more openly. Has anyone else obtained a
>>> formal legal determination that their particular implemention of
>>> openid2 is not infringing on the ip of others (or that the usage
>>> falls within the scope of licensed rights)?
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Johannes Ernst <jernst+openid.net at netmesh.us>
>>> Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 11:34 AM
>>> To: Peter Williams <pwilliams at rapattoni.com>
>>> Cc: general at openid.net <general at openid.net>
>>> Subject: Re: [OpenID] OpenID 2.0 is final
>>>
>>> There is no legal advice involved, only the construction of the
>>> documents that were signed and that are published on openid.net.  
>>> Many
>>> companies contributed their legal expertise, including Sun,  
>>> Symantec,
>>> Microsoft, Yahoo, IBM, VeriSign, and AOL among the big guys if I
>>> recall this correctly. (Somebody please correct me if I forgot
>>> anyone.) The companies that have signed those so far obviously had  
>>> to
>>> rely on their own views on whether to sign them or not, and those
>>> views were strong enough that the process has dragged out for this
>>> long ... but now we are done.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Dec 6, 2007, at 7:39, Peter Williams wrote:
>>>
>>>> Who paid the legal bills and which law firm provided the patent
>>>> counsel to the openid fundation?
>>>>
>>>> Is the legal advice available to all to see, or only foundation
>>>> members?
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Johannes Ernst <jernst+openid.net at netmesh.us>
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 7:53 PM
>>>> To: general at openid.net <general at openid.net>
>>>> Subject: [OpenID] OpenID 2.0 is final
>>>>
>>>> Seems like nobody actually made the announcement to this list, so I
>>>> might as well because it needs to be made ...
>>>>
>>>> This morning, at Internet Identity Workshop, after the last
>>>> remaining
>>>> Non-Assertion Agreement was signed, Open ID Authentication 2.0 and
>>>> Attribute Exchange 1.0 were declared final. The website has been
>>>> updated to reflect this.
>>>>
>>>> This is important not just because of new specifications, but
>>>> because
>>>> it clarifies the so far rather unclear intellectual property /
>>>> patent
>>>> circumstances of these two specs as well as several previous
>>>> specs. In
>>>> a nutshell, you can now implement all OpenID and Yadis
>>>> specifications
>>>> without being afraid that contributors will sue you over patents,
>>>> unless you sue them. (disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer and I'm not
>>>> giving
>>>> legal advice.)
>>>>
>>>> The details of the IPR have been posted at
>>>>  http://openid.net/foundation/intellectual-property/
>>>>
>>>> Thanks to the editors of the specs, all individuals and companies
>>>> spending substantial time energy on the IPR process, the prodding
>>>> and
>>>> cajoling, and not insignificant legal fees, the members of the
>>>> board,
>>>> and the entire community.
>>>>
>>>> It's done! Now on to new great deeds! ;-)
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Johannes.
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> general mailing list
>>>> general at openid.net
>>>> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> general mailing list
>>>> general at openid.net
>>>> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> general mailing list
>>> general at openid.net
>>> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> general mailing list
> general at openid.net
> http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/general

- - - - -
Pat Patterson
Federation Architect, Sun Microsystems, Inc.
pat.patterson at sun.com - http://blogs.sun.com/superpat
- - - - -
Join OpenSSO today! http://opensso.dev.java.net/
- - - - -