[KI-LC] Heads-up on an interesting question
joni at ieee-isto.org
Wed Oct 2 15:54:07 CDT 2013
Thanks Eve. Yes I'd like to see if other groups have faced this challenge
or have input to the discussion. I suggest that we identify actions on an
organizational basis once (versus case-by-case) and possibly create simple
policy guidance - considering UMA and all groups who might come in to this
kind of situation. LC as the leaders of Kantara Innovation are the natural
place to start.
Thanks in advance to chairs for their thoughts.
Kantara Initiative | Executive Director
email: joni @ kantarainitiative.org
Building Trusted Identity Ecosystems - It takes a village!
On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 1:07 PM, Eve Maler <eve at xmlgrrl.com> wrote:
> A company recently came upon UMA and expressed interest in potentially
> implementing it, switching from their self-created access control plumbing
> to UMA's open protocol. The company has some patents that may or may not
> have anything to do with UMA -- and therein lies an interesting challenge.
> The company is uncertain about joining the WG because of the IPR regime of
> the group, and I'm reluctant to encourage UMAnitarians to take a look at
> the company's IP out of an abundance of caution around becoming "tainted"
> with knowledge of IP that UMA might ultimately add in any future design
> work, potentially encumbering the spec.
> I asked Joni about the appropriateness of seeking the advice of a Kantara
> legal expert, and she thought I should bring the question here, potentially
> escalating to the Board if we see fit. Can we discuss at the next
> opportunity? (Unfortunately, I'm not sure what that is in my case, since
> I'll shortly be on the road for nearly two weeks!)
> Thanks, folks,
> Eve Maler http://www.xmlgrrl.com/blog
> +1 425 345 6756 http://www.twitter.com/xmlgrrl
> LC mailing list
> LC at kantarainitiative.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the LC