Sam Ruby asked:
> Do we have a formal definition that we can employ for the term "open
> standards"?

Here's my try at a definition of "open standards" in the form of five Open
Standards Principles. These were first proposed at the conference of the
Open Standards Alliance in Phoenix last year. John Terpstra is organizing
that OSA activity. I welcome your feedback on these principles. 


Open Standards Principles

1.      Everyone is free to copy and distribute the official 
        specification for an open standard under an open source 
        license.

2.      Everyone is free to make or use embodiments of an open 
        standard under unconditional licenses to patent claims 
        necessary to practice that standard.

3.      Everyone is free to distribute externally, sell, offer
        for sale, have made or import embodiments of an open 
        standard under patent licenses that may be conditioned 
        only on reciprocal licenses to any of licensees’ patent
        claims necessary to practice that standard.

4.      A patent license for an open standard may be terminated
        as to any licensee who sues the licensor or any other 
        licensee for infringement of patent claims necessary to 
        practice that standard. 

5.      All patent licenses necessary to practice an open standard 
        are worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive, perpetual and
        sublicenseable.


Lawrence Rosen
Rosenlaw & Einschlag, technology law offices (www.rosenlaw.com)
3001 King Ranch Road, Ukiah, CA 95482
707-485-1242  ●  fax: 707-485-1243
Author of “Open Source Licensing: Software Freedom 
               and Intellectual Property Law” (Prentice Hall 2004)
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sam Ruby [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 5:45 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: patent licenses on OASIS standards
> 
> Lawrence Rosen wrote:
> >
> > Industry players, in particular Microsoft, hate our appropriation of the
> > term "open standards" to mean our version of patent and copyright
> licensing.
> 
> Do we have a formal definition that we can employ for the term "open
> standards"?
> 
> A quick google search turned up the following:
> 
> http://perens.com/OpenStandards/Definition.html
> 
> - Sam Ruby


---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only, are not privileged and do not constitute legal advice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to