<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:st1="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]--><o:SmartTagType
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="PersonName"/>
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Bookman Old Style";
panose-1:2 5 6 4 5 5 5 2 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:Arial;
color:navy;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;
text-decoration:none none;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=blue>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>I just spoke with Drummond on the phone. He's
suggesting two very reasonable process changes:<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'> - Recognize contributions posted to
official working group web sites and wikis<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'> - Possibly increase the size of the
specs council from 5 to 7<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>He's also interested in being more
explicit about the reasons that the board could decide not to approve things.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>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!<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>I also appreciate Bill's observation below
that we're now talking about only process changes, not changes to the IPR
policy itself.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'> Cheers,<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'> --
Mike<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center tabindex=-1>
</span></font></div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Tahoma;font-weight:bold'>From:</span></font></b><font size=2
face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'>
legal-bounces@openid.net [mailto:legal-bounces@openid.net] <b><span
style='font-weight:bold'>On Behalf Of </span></b>Bill Washburn<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> Wednesday, November 28, 2007
8:09 AM<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b> Dick Hardt; board@openid.net<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Cc:</span></b> <st1:PersonName w:st="on">legal@openid.net</st1:PersonName>;
Bill Washburn<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></b> Re: [legal] [OpenID
board] Feedback on latest drafts of OpenID IPR Policy and Process</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><font size=2
face="Bookman Old Style"><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Bookman Old Style"'>Scott,
Dick,<br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
This proposal that you, Scott, describe as "fantastic" is something
about which you are both in strong agreement. So far, so good, right?<br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
cheers,<br>
-bill<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>----- Original Message ----<br>
From: Dick Hardt <dick@sxip.com><br>
To: board@openid.net<br>
Cc: <st1:PersonName w:st="on">legal@openid.net</st1:PersonName>; Bill Washburn
<bill@oidf.org><br>
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 7:36:10 AM<br>
Subject: Re: [legal] [OpenID board] Feedback on latest drafts of OpenID IPR
Policy and Process<br>
<br>
<br>
On 28-Nov-07, at 7:19 AM, Scott Kveton wrote:<br>
<br>
>> I agree with Drummond's comments. I have not had time to review
the<br>
>> documents, and likely won't until late this week.<br>
>><br>
>> A suggestion I have around major decisions would be to put them <br>
>> out for<br>
>> referendum to members of the OIDF. We can use OpenIDs to
identity <br>
>> people and<br>
>> easily to electronic voting. This puts the power clearly in the <br>
>> hands of the<br>
>> community instead of in the hands of the board or spec council. <br>
>> Changes to<br>
>> the policy and final approval of specifications and potential <br>
>> approval of<br>
>> WGs could be done this way. The spec council and board could
take <br>
>> a position<br>
>> and make recommendation, but putting the major decisions in the <br>
>> hands of the<br>
>> community clearly empowers them and keeps the board and council from<br>
>> becoming an old boys network and leaving the membership feeling <br>
>> out of the<br>
>> loop.<br>
><br>
> I think this is a fantastic idea in the long-term but doesn't fit well<br>
> with the goals we've set out as a board to try and adopt the IPR (or<br>
> get as close as possible) by IIW.<br>
<br>
Is the goal to rubber stamp the IPR (primarily driven by large <br>
vendors) or to create an IPR that protects and empowers the <br>
community, which we as a board represent?<br>
<br>
I don't think there is a second chance to do the IPR.<br>
<br>
-- Dick<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
legal mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:legal@openid.net" ymailto="mailto:legal@openid.net">legal@openid.net</a><br>
<a href="http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/legal" target="_blank">http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/legal</a><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face="Bookman Old Style"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Bookman Old Style"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>