Re: submission license re-write

  The draft text for ckpt 5.3 looks fine - it clearly requires the WG to
take responsibility for negotiating a suitable licence.

  What is not clear is how this relates to the W3C's existing licences
  such as this software licence:

[ URL: http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2002/copyright-software-20021231 
]

  Since this s/w licence imposes certain requirements, should any 
test-related
software be subject to these requirements? Is a WG allowed to override any 
the
clauses in copyright-software-20021231?

Likewise for any non-software testing materials - should the
copyright-documents-20021231 licence be reagrded as the core licence on 
which
other clauses can be added?
[ URL: 
http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2002/copyright-documents-20021231 ]

I think the relationship between any new licence created by the WG and 
these two
existing licences is the only issue remaining with this ckpt. The 
relationship is mentioned
in the discussion section - I think any overriding principles, standards 
or licences
should be referenced and it should be made clear that either they can not 
be breached,
or under what circumstances they can be.

-Andrew

On 2002.12.22 20:59 Lofton Henderson wrote:
> Andrew,
> 
> When the WG version of OpsGL is posted, I'd appreciate it if you would 
> have a look at the several inter-related bits in this thread (submission 
> license, publication license, free availability, free use, ...).
> 
> Will you accept the action item to do that and give us comments?
>

Received on Monday, 6 January 2003 13:23:23 UTC