<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:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" 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 14 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.apple-style-span
{mso-style-name:apple-style-span;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></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=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>John,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>I hate to be the only one who disagrees with this assertion, but honestly most lawsuits I have had to deal with are initiated by those <i>not</i> engaged in some standardization effort and/or who purchased patents from companies who might have previously been engaged in the standardization effort.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>I’d gladly accept a patent statement much like those submitted to the IETF for various RFCs. At least you know where the companies stand. It’s those lurking in the dark somewhere that are a problem. Worse, they’ll sometimes wait until the historical record is gone, making it even more challenging to prove that whatever they claim in a patent wasn’t already disclosed. And, with the US patent process the way it is, you can introduce something today and I can file a patent today. I could claim I invented it a year ago and I might even be awarded the patent. Unless you could <i>prove</i> that you had disclosed it publicly at least a year prior, then the patent would be valid.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>The patent system is a bit of a mess, to say the least.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>So, while I admire the effort to make OpenID free and I’m supportive of that effort, I’d personally prefer a simple IPR process where companies declare their IPR, etc. It works for the IETF and other organizations, so why not follow the same model?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Paul<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div style='border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt'><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> openid-specs-bounces@lists.openid.net [mailto:openid-specs-bounces@lists.openid.net] <b>On Behalf Of </b>John Bradley<br><b>Sent:</b> Monday, July 12, 2010 9:58 PM<br><b>To:</b> Eric Sachs<br><b>Cc:</b> openid-specs@lists.openid.net<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: Connect WG?<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I know people get frustrated because they want to just do stuff.<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>However the IPR process and agreements protect everyone from someone coming along later and asserting patents after people have built products.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Everyone who wants to work on Connect should start the process of joining the WG now and not wait.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>John B.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal>On 2010-07-12, at 9:30 PM, Eric Sachs wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><br><br><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>>> <span class=apple-style-span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>People who work for large companies may take some time to get approva</span></span><o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span class=apple-style-span><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>To put it mildly :-(</span></span><o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 3:37 PM, John Bradley <<a href="mailto:john.bradley@wingaa.com">john.bradley@wingaa.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>The charter was approved.<br><br>The next step is for people to get there IPR agreements in and start the work.<br><br>I don't know if David has his in yet.<br><br>People who work for large companies may take some time to get approval.<br><br>Regards<br>John B.<o:p></o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><br>On 2010-07-12, at 4:39 PM, Dan Brickley wrote:<br><br>> On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 10:37 PM, Eric Sachs <<a href="mailto:esachs@google.com">esachs@google.com</a>> wrote:<br>>> A whole bunch of Yahoo and Google folks are on vacation in July and August,<br>>> and during the time they are working they are probably going to focus on<br>>> finalizing OAuth 2.0. So my bet is we won't have a lot of activity on the<br>>> mailing list until late August. However David Recordon said he might have<br>>> time in a few weeks to start pulling together some material.<br>><br>> Backing up a bit, ... was there a management decision in the<br>> Foundation to proceed with a Connect WG? Or that mailing list activity<br>> would be towards putting together a refined proposal? How do things<br>> work here?<br>><br>> Dan<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>> _______________________________________________<br>> specs mailing list<br>> <a href="mailto:specs@lists.openid.net">specs@lists.openid.net</a><br>> <a href="http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs" target="_blank">http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs</a><o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></div></body></html>