[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] Code-First IP flow?
|
Mike Milinkovich wrote on 05/31/2018 12:40 PM:
> On 2018-05-30 11:32 PM, Bill Shannon wrote:
>>> The only way that CXF could update the Eclipse JAX-RS API project would be to
>>> make contributions to that project under the EPL-2.0 license. Although not
>>> perfect, I don't see the basis of a lawsuit or alleged infringement based on
>>> an EPL-2.0 implementation derived from an EPL-2.0-licensed API contribution.
>>> Possible? Sure. Plausible? Meh.
>>>
>>> A more formal way to handle this might be to put the API JAR maintenance in
>>> the same project as the specification document itself, and only evolve the
>>> JAR files as the specification document evolves. This means that a
>>> participant would have to make the changes, and the patents held by all of
>>> the participants would be essential claims and therefore contributed.
>> Would they be "contributed" even before a specification is formally proposed
>> to include those changes? Does any update to the javadocs (for example) count
>> as a contribution to a spec, even before the spec is formally proposed?
>
> I am confused by this scenario.
>
> Let's just talk about it on the call tomorrow. I'm pretty sure that would be
> more efficient that yet another a long-winded email.
Sure.
These are just more questions to be answered by the IP flow.
When is IP considered "contributed" to a specification so that
it is available to independent implementations?
