On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 11:55 AM, David Fisher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What do you consider the "pony" requests?
At the moment, all of them. Feel free to point your flame throwers my way. I can take it. I have no doubt that Microsoft has patents on web servers and that other companies have patents on XML based document formats. What I need to know is what specific licenses are licensees of POI known to require in order to make use of our Work? I will add that I do not like the current patent system - either US or worldwide. But that is beyond my ability to fix, beyond the ability our our counsel to fix, and beyond the ability of Microsoft's counsel to fix. It may be possible that in the future we may become aware of additional licenses required either of us or of our licensees in order to distribute or make use of our work. Dwelling on such hypotheticals is not a productive use of our time. Legally, we can not distribute our Work unless we have the rights necessary to do so granted to us. By policy, we will not distribute our Work unless our licensees have the rights necessary to "practice" or make use our Work. We have a very high profile and ongoing dispute with another vendor on similar matters. If nothing else, it should show that we are very serious about such things. In the extreme case, it could very well mean that we yank some portions of specific products or even entire projects. Returning back to POI, we would apply the same standard here. I have every reason to believe that Microsoft is interested in promoting ISO/IEC 29500 and/or ECMA 376. Having an implementation of this standard made available under a permissive and open source license would seem to be consistent with their goals of supporting this standard. Having us yank said implementation as a direct result of an action that Microsoft may contemplate in the future -- while devastating to POI -- would not be consistent with Microsoft's interests in promoting this standard. And if you are interested in disclaimers, I happen to work for IBM. I am aware that there are people at IBM who feel strongly that OOXML is counter productive. On this matter, at least in the context of POI, I am decidedly agnostic. I have also worked with ECMA in the past, in particular on ECMA 334 and ECMA 335. > I don't see how we can possibly reach a resolution prior to this weekend > threatened "button pushing" - Andy will you withdraw your threat while Sam > pursues this "private" discussion? I would propose that Sam gives us all > updates as appropriate. Perhaps you should back up your "deadline" by > another week? I will not work under deadline unless somebody can point out an credible, imminent external threat to the foundation. If the only threat we have is that one committer has expressed an intent to act irresponsibly, then as far as I am concerned, that's what version control systems are for. Everything beyond that is an internal matter for the POI PMC to deal with. But I will offer to meet Andy at Azitra in Briar Creek next week for some "Authentic Indian Fair". Yes, such a meeting would be private, but as I recall, the last time we ate there the food was delicious. - Sam Ruby --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
