[OpenID] Press Release

[Hans Granqvist]

Hi all

Do the new IPR policy and process documents implicitly cover
participating on the @openid.net mailing lists? That is, is anything
discussed on the lists considered covered by the docs?

Not to be difficult about it, but I've asked a few time over the last
month and not seen an answer. Did I miss it? It would help a lot
to know what can be said here, and with what IP expectations.

Thanks,
Hans

PS. I spot "missing reference" in the doc, for example 3.1,  first
paragraph.



On 2/7/08, Dick Hardt <dick at sxip.com> wrote:
> Peter
>
> I would imagine the intent of the phrase is to keep the core of
> OpenID from becoming proprietary.
>
> I would encourage you to define new properties in your own namespace
> for your sub-community. If there is a reason why they need to be
> proprietary -- ie you want to control who can use them, I don't see
> that as evil. I would expect that many of the new properties would be
> of interest to all members in the sub-community.
>
> The OpenID Foundation does not determine the protocol. The protocol
> is determined by the community. Extensions and enhancements are
> determined by the community. Anyone of course can write their own
> extensions, and they can be proprietary. They just won't be able to
> be called part of OpenID if they are not approved according to the
> OpenID Intellectual Property Process.
>
>         http://openid.net/ipr/OpenID_Process_Document_
> (Final_Clean_20071221).pdf
>
> -- Dick
>
> On 7-Feb-08, at 7:52 AM, Peter Williams wrote:
>
> > What does this mean?
> >
> > "OpenID was always intended to be a decentralized sign-on system,
> > so it's fantastic to join a foundation committed to keeping it free
> > and unencumbered by proprietary extensions."
> >
> > If I want for my sub-community to define my own namespace in the AX
> > protocol (as the technology allows), am I an evil "proprietary
> > extension maker"?
> >
> > If I want to define my own tags for use the the extensible XRD, am
> > I an evil...
> >
> > Can only the OpenID Foundation use all those extension points in
> > the protocol?
> >
> > Unlike SSL (which allows for privately defined extensions), and
> > unlike X.509 (which allows for privately defined extensions), in
> > OpenID culture will there be can be allowance for privately defined
> > extensions?
> >
> > I think we need an explicit mechanism for denoting which extensions
> > are privately-defined (and which therefore have community blessing
> > for their creation and use in the defined sub-community).
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: general-bounces at openid.net on behalf of Bill Washburn
> > Sent: Thu 2/7/2008 7:26 AM
> > To: OpenID List
> > Subject: [OpenID] Press Release
> >
> >
> > FYI...
> >
> > http://www.marketwire.com/mw/release.do?id=818650
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > SOURCE: OpenID Foundation
> >
> >  <http://openid.net/foundation>
> > Feb 07, 2008 09:00 ET
> >
> > Technology Leaders Join OpenID Foundation to Promote Open Identity
> > Management on the Web
> >
> >
> > OpenID Foundation to Support Internet User Single Sign-On Technology
> >
> >
> > CORVALLIS, OR--(Marketwire - February 7, 2008) - The OpenID
> > Foundation <http://openid.net/foundation>  today announced that
> > Google (NASDAQ: GOOG <http://www.marketwire.com/mw/stock.jsp?
> > Ticker=GOOG> ), IBM (NYSE: IBM <http://www.ibm.com/investor/> ),
> > Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT <http://www.marketwire.com/mw/stock.jsp?
> > Ticker=MSFT> ), VeriSign (NASDAQ: VRSN <http://www.marketwire.com/
> > mw/stock.jsp?Ticker=VRSN> ) and Yahoo! (NASDAQ: YHOO <http://
> > www.marketwire.com/mw/stock.jsp?Ticker=YHOO> ) have joined as its
> > first corporate board members.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>