RE: [oasis-charter-discuss] Nonresponsiveness to Charter IPR Comments

Many 
thanks Orit

Plus I 
would add that we will be dealing with other SDO such as TM Forum, ITU-T etc.. 
and  working closely with them to get requirements from their documents. 
These SDO operate under RAND and as such this make the flow of information 
between the OASIS SOA TC and the other SDO more fluid.

 

Cheers

Abbie

 

From: Orit Levin [mailto:] 

Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 12:32 PM
To: 
; 

Subject: RE: 
[oasis-charter-discuss] Nonresponsiveness to Charter IPR 
Comments

I am aware of an explicit discussion that did take place at the convener call 
and I am happy to summarize on this list why we think that the RAND mode of 
operation for this particular TC (SOA-TEL) is the most appropriate way to 
go:

1. This TC is NOT going to produce any technical 
specifications.
2. This TC is about gathering requirements backed up by use 
cases and scenarios and their applicability to existing technologies.
3. This 
TC is about bringing as many as possible telecoms and vendors working in the 
Telecom area who feel most comfortable with RAND to contribute to the 
discussion.

These are the reasons why, in our view, RAND will make 
SOA-TEL TC work more open, inclusive, and efficient.

Hope this helps.

Best Regards,

Ms. Orit Levin  |  Senior Standards Program Manager  
|  Entertainment & Devices Division  |  Microsoft Corporation 

  |  V: +1 425 722 2225  |  F: +1 425 936 
7329

________________________________________
From: Dennis E. Hamilton 
[]
Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 10:09 AM
To: 

Subject: [oasis-charter-discuss] 
Nonresponsiveness to Charter IPR Comments

There is a very odd boilerplate 
response in how some Charter comments are
addressed.  I'm sure it does 
not go without notice, but I'm going to call it
out anyhow.

When 
someone says "I do not understand why this needs to be done under RAND
mode," 
to say "RAND is a valid OASIS IPR mode" is completely unresponsive.
It should 
be assumed that the questioner already knows that. The question
being asked 
is "Why is RAND mode adopted as opposed to one of the
more-lenient and 
predictable OASIS IPR modes?"

To beg the question in this way is simply 
confirming the fears of those who
ask concerning unspoken agendas and 
intentions to (reserve the right to)
extract royalties.

This response 
can continue to be used, but at some point forthrightness and
transparency 
would seem to be a preferable approach to creating a charter
where any sort 
of broad participation/adoption and support for adoption as
an eventual OASIS 
Standard is the objective. If the convener and proposers
are simply hedging 
their bets, they should maybe grow up and say it like it
is, even biting the 
bullet and make a solid declaration -- there is IP that
will be asserted or 
there is and it will be RF on RAND or even RF on Limited
Terms.  If the 
potential IP is speculative, commit about that up front so
others understand 
what they are walking into and freely contributing into if
they choose to do 
that.

 - Dennis

Dennis E. 
Hamilton
------------------
NuovoDoc: Design for Document System 
Interoperability
mailto: | 
gsm:+1-206.779.9430
http://NuovoDoc.com http://ODMA.info/dev/ 
http://nfoWorks.org

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To 
unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates 
this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS 
at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php