W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > site-comments@w3.org > June 2010

Re: http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/IPR-FAQ-20000620.html#holds

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2010 17:59:00 +0100
Message-Id: <FB449ABB-C759-4092-9DBA-4FFA0F0B6A86@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: site-comments@w3.org
To: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
On 9 Jun 2010, at 17:51, Ian Jacobs wrote:

> On 9 Jun 2010, at 10:16 AM, Bijan Parsia wrote:
>
>> http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/IPR-FAQ-20000620.html#holds
>>
>> This answer doesn't quite make sense. Presumably, authors agree to  
>> license their work to the W3C such that the W3C can sublicense it  
>> under the W3C document (and perhaps somewhat more liberal)  
>> license. The copyright holder doesn't have anything to agree *to*,  
>> otherwise.
>
> Hi Bijan,
>
> Rigo Wenning and I are planning to revisit the FAQ as part of  
> licensing discussions. I will take this comment as input.

Thanks!

Here's a fuller version:

	http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-comments/2010Jun/ 
0019.html

It would be great to have a link to the member agreement passage that  
makes that clear.

I notice that it doesn't say "irrevocable", which might be worth  
incorporating. I know "irrevocability" clauses are weird, etc. but if  
you are revisiting anyway it might be something to work in.

Cheers,
Bijan.
Received on Wednesday, 9 June 2010 16:58:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 24 October 2012 16:21:33 GMT