Re: DRAFT Agenda for the Process Call Wednesday 12th February 7am PDT

On 2/12/2020 9:45 AM, Michael Champion wrote:
>
>
>> On Feb 12, 2020, at 6:00 AM, Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org 
>> <mailto:jeff@w3.org>> wrote:
>>
>> Note that there is no current proposal that this should be brought to 
>> the AC for approval.  I hope that we get AC reps who have not been 
>> involved in the discussion to comment and add their ideas
>
>
> Thanks for the clarification.  I thought you were asking for CG 
> consensus that the draft is ready for final approval by the AB and AC. 
> I don’t agree with that, but agree it’s time to encourage wider review 
> of the draft by the AC and WG members who would be affected by it.
>
> I do think you’re trying to rush PSIG with the patent policy changes.

Yes, we'll see how it goes.

The PSIG timetable is partially driven by them.  They worked hard last 
spring developing a PP for Evergreen.  When we moved from EG to ET, they 
didn't want to again work hard unless we were stable with ET.  They held 
off until November when the AB told them that ET was the stable 
direction (with some details still TBD).  So they have only restarted in 
December.  But it is at least based on their work from last spring.

> I guess you can see how their F2F goes to get a sense of what a 
> plausible timeline might be.  All I can say is that I’ve spent several 
> years now trying to push lawyers to move faster on WHATWG issues. I 
> learned that it takes as long as it’s gonna take for attorneys who 
> represent each other’s biggest business competitors — but whose 
> biggest threat are non-practicing entities —  to come to agreement on 
> things that gain them nothing quantifiable but could cost billions if 
> they leave an exploitable loophole open.
>
>
>