[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
Re: [microprofile-wg] Consensus thread on Implementation patent license vs Compatible patent license
|
Sorry for the delayed
response, but...+1 for Implementation
Patent License (IBM)
---------------------------------------------------
Kevin Sutter
STSM, Jakarta EE and MicroProfile architect @ IBM
e-mail: sutter@xxxxxxxxxx Twitter: @kwsutter
phone: tl-553-3620 (office), 507-253-3620 (office)
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinwsutter
Part-time schedule: Tue, Wed, Thu (off on Mon and Fri)From:
Edwin
Derks <ederks85@xxxxxxxxx>To:
Microprofile
WG discussions <microprofile-wg@xxxxxxxxxxx>Date:
06/01/2021
05:31Subject:
[EXTERNAL]
Re: [microprofile-wg] Consensus thread on Implementation patent license
vs Compatible patent licenseSent
by: "microprofile-wg"
<microprofile-wg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>
+1 Implementation Patent Licence (Committer
Representative)This feels more natural to how MicroProfile
works and encourages people to contribute On Thu, 27 May 2021 at 14:54, Summers
Pittman <summers@xxxxxxxx>
wrote:+1 Implementation Patent License (AJUG) As there are other way to ensure compliance
(as David mentioned) a more liberal patent approach sounds appropriate.On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 8:41 AM Ruslan
Synytsky <rs@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:+ 1 for Implementation Patent License
(Jelastic). It looks more suitable for this stage of the project, from
our perspective. Thanks On Wed, 26 May 2021 at 22:11, Jan Westerkamp
<jan.westerkamp@xxxxxxx>
wrote:+1 for Implementation Patent License(iJUG)
Why:
We have to make a decision about some sort of patent "peace contract"
between Eclipse/MPWG Members (not the world) and we have to choose between
a liberal variant (Implementation Patent License, IPL) or a narrower one
(Compatible Patent Licence, CPL).
In an "Implementation First" approach process we think it is
important to protect members and users of MicroProfile as early as possible
during the process to prevent unnecessary lawsuits or blocking early adoption.
While from the patent protection view CPL is a subset of IPL, the usage
of CPL within Jakarta EE as (current) default (there was no choice between
two options at the time of defining the process and patent licence there)
and IPL in MicroProfile is compatible.
Note:
In the EU software patents should not be allowed - while the practical
truth of the EPA might be something different...
With my 5-minutes-attention to the topic I personally tended to CPL: As
a technician I like deterministic behaviour with TCK proof instead or lawyers
opinion.
With 30-minutes-attention I changed my mind, because I learned the patent
licence is something different form the guarantee to have 100% compatibility
of implementations to the specifications - the last one will be established
due to run the TCK successfully and can be showed through TCK result and
the allowed usage of the MP Compatibility Logo.
For the current contest for that logo it might be not enough to let the
contributors sign the standard EF Contribution Agreement - as it guarantees
non-exclusive use to the EF and not exclusive use (or grant by passing
the TCK) of the MicroProfile Working Group?
But that´s another story ;-)
Disclaimer:
I am not a lawyer too :-)
Jan Westerkamp
PS: Many thanks to the attendees of the MicroProfile talk we had last week
at JUG Darmstadt, where I had the chance to discuss this topic with them
afterwards.Am 26.05.21 um 20:58 schrieb David Blevins:+1 for Implementation Patent
License We have a compatibility
program we're building to motivate compliance.For the Compatible
Patent License: If an implementor viewed the legal risk as a motivator
for being compliant, it would be seen by those same eyes as a motivator
to not implement a spec before it is final. We want people implementing
specs early, before they are final, as that leads to the highest quality
final product with the most implementations. Getting an implementors
feedback after a spec is final creates more opportunities for after-the-fact
insights and potential for backwards incompatible changes.
-- David Blevinshttp://twitter.com/dblevins
http://www.tomitribe.comOn May 26, 2021, at 1:59 AM, John Clingan
<jclingan@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:The MicroProfile Steering Committee needs
to select its patent license. The ballot language requires verbiage that
Steering Committee can vote on (+1,-1,0), and the two patent license verbiage
options are outlined below. Here is a recent post by
Mike Milinkovich on the patent license topic, and David wrote
up an example. Neither claim
to be lawyers :-) The intellectual property policy is here (pdf).
While anyone can select their preferred
patent license ballot option, only steering committee member selection
will be counted towards the selected ballot language. Once consensus
is reached, the Steering Committee will conduct a ballot on the preferred
option.Please select the desired patent license:Implementation Patent LicenseRESOLVED, the MicroProfile Steering Committee
approves the use of theImplementation Patent License as defined
in the Eclipse Foundation IntellectualProperty Policy for all specifications
under the purview of this Working Group.or
Compatible Patent LicenseRESOLVED, the MicroProfile Steering Committee
approves the use of theCompatible Patent License as defined
in the Eclipse Foundation IntellectualProperty Policy for all specifications
under the purview of this Working Group._______________________________________________
microprofile-wg mailing list
microprofile-wg@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/microprofile-wg
_______________________________________________
microprofile-wg mailing list
microprofile-wg@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/microprofile-wg
_______________________________________________
microprofile-wg mailing list
microprofile-wg@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/microprofile-wg
--
Ruslan Synytsky
CEO @ Jelastic
Multi-Cloud PaaS_______________________________________________
microprofile-wg mailing list
microprofile-wg@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/microprofile-wg
_______________________________________________
microprofile-wg mailing list
microprofile-wg@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/microprofile-wg_______________________________________________
microprofile-wg mailing list
microprofile-wg@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/microprofile-wg