- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 08:57:33 -0500
- To: public-w3process@w3.org
On 12/19/2014 08:42 AM, Jeff Jaffe wrote: > > On 12/19/2014 8:00 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote: >> Since it seems like any restriction on derivative work upon an IE's >> termination could result in reduced (perhaps eliminated) employment >> opportunities, > > I'd be interested in understanding better how this impacts future > employment. > > Here is my understanding of the current IE agreement. > > If an IE does not sign the agreement he has no rights to branch the spec. > > If an IE signs the agreement he has no rights to branch the spec. > > So it seems to me that signing the agreement does not reduce any rights. I encourage you to explore a different scenario, one in which an individual authors work and publishes it independently. That person subsequently becomes interested in granting to the W3C a perpetual, nonexclusive, royalty-free, world-wide right to make use of this work. One way that doing so reduces that individuals rights that I hope we can all here agree is desirable is that it would make it more difficult for that individual to subsequently successfully pursue patent litigation against somebody who complies with the license terms under which the W3C choses to make it available. I'm certainly cool with that, both as a contributor and as a requirement that we need to impose. Another way that the current Invited Expert agreement constrains their rights was explained by Michael Champion here: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-w3process/2014Dec/0111.html I, for one, object to any requirements along those lines. > Jeff - Sam Ruby
Received on Friday, 19 December 2014 13:58:01 UTC