Re: [emergency] Successful Emergency Management IPR Transition Ballot

[Renato Iannella <renato@nicta.com.au>]

On 4 Oct 2006, at 11:43, Elysa Jones wrote:

We covered it again today just be sure everyone understood and it will be documented in the minutes of todays meeting.� During our discussions over the months, all TC members expressed an interest in keeping the work of the TC as open and free as possible.� The choice the TC agreed to is RF on RAND as described on the OASIS site at�http://www.oasis-open.org/who/intellectualproperty.php. This mode requires anyone submitting information to the TC that may have IP claims to be fully disclosed as such to the group.� The group can then chose to include it or not.� The consensus of the TC membership now is that we would not accept any IP to be included in our work products.��

I just really want to know why "RF and RAND" was chosen over "RF on Limited Terms"?

It seems to me that the latter is (slightly) "open and freer" than the former??

Cheers...� Renato Iannella

National ICT Australia (NICTA)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
This email and any attachments may be confidential. They may contain legally
privileged information or copyright material. You should not read, copy,
use or disclose them without authorisation. If you are not an intended
recipient, please contact us at once by return email and then delete both
messages. We do not accept liability in connection with computer virus,
data corruption, delay, interruption, unauthorised access or unauthorised
amendment. This notice should not be removed.