- From: Susan Lesch <lesch@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 23:50:59 -0700
- To: www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org
Hello, Eighteen people attended the 8 April 2002 Patent Policy Working Group (PPWG) teleconference. The group again talked about disclosure requirements for non-participants in a Working Group with unpublished applications. There was some agreement that the wording in section 4.2 of the latest Working Draft [1] was originally written to deal with published applications and now might be ambiguous. A proposal sent to the group divided this issue into parts, and the group took straw polls on each part. The results of these polls were often close. What seemed at first to be decided was that W3C Members who are not participants in a given Working Group, must disclose the existence of unpublished applications that may have essential claims, only when they are based on Working Group information. No requirement to disclose more than the existence of these claims was agreed to. It was pointed out that under these circumstances disclosure gives that Member a negative image. Some PPWG participants were unhappy with the straw poll results, and the issue was moved to email. The rest of the meeting was devoted to obligations of W3C invited experts. The group agreed that the wording in section 4.3 of the last Working Draft [1] is fine. No one in the group expects invited experts to breach NDAs (non-disclosure agreements), attorney/client privilege, or other matters of duty. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-patent-policy-20020226/#sec-Disclosure Best wishes, -- Susan Lesch http://www.w3.org/People/Lesch/ mailto:lesch@w3.org tel:+1.858.483.4819 World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) http://www.w3.org/
Received on Wednesday, 17 April 2002 00:48:55 UTC