Sam Ruby wrote:
There are cases where we need nothing more than the Apache License, Version 2.0. There are cases where we require an ICLA in addition to the Apache License. Similarly there are cases where a CCLA is warranted in addtion to an ICLA. In this case, Andy feels that we need something more. At the present time, Gianugo does not apparently feel that is necessary.So where does that put things then? If the opinion of the legal-cmmt is that, although Andy's concerns are understood and appreciated, they are not considered (legally) with merit, then what happens with the veto? Does that "invalidate" it due to the technical reasons for the veto not being applicable?"not considered (legally) with merit" is perhaps overstating it. One of the questions I specifically asked on legal-internal "Are there additional agreements that we should be pursuing with Microsoft at this time?". I did not hear any objections and actually got an indication that this was "a great idea". And the impression I got today from Andy was that this is all Andy is asking for.
yes.
Of course, the devil is in the details. I'd like to see this scoped as narrowly as possible. It should define "You" and "Contribution" in a manner consistent with the current CCLA, and should define a patent Grant consistent with section 3 of the CCLA. Based on prior conversations, I got the impression that a full CCLA would satisfy Andy.
okay. mostly the CCLA Nick explained in a way that I have come very close to understanding on why it would not really do anything. This seems to be a contended point.
Roy's message I really didn't get. If I pay you to do some work for me in the garden then you are then authorized to sell my house?
As I see it, the ball is in Andy's court, as it were. If he does pursue drafting such an agreement, I can not guarantee that the ASF would approve the agreement, or that Microsoft would sign it, or that POI would chose not to proceed in the event that Microsoft did not chose to sign the agreement.
I will do so and confer as you suggested. I will delay any rash action until I feel that I've no recourse. This is no longer the case.
On the other hand, I gave Andy specific pointers, indicated that there does seem to be some openness to the idea, and indicated that I would help. So, while I can not predict the future, the one thing that Andy can not say is that he has hit a dead end just yet. And Andy realizes that he is part of an all volunteer organization, and indicated his continued willingness to devote time and effort towards resolving this issue.
yes.
Again, if I am now overstating anything Andy might have said to me at lunch, he is welcome to correct me.
I just want to clarify that I had no particular opinion on the CCLA thing. By my read it would work. Nick explains why he thinks it wouldn't and I nearly understand. I'll get clarification here. I only care that we have sufficient patent grants to cover the work microsof t is funding through sourcesense.
- Sam Ruby --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Buni Meldware Communication Suite http://buni.org Multi-platform and extensible Email, Calendaring (including freebusy), Rich Webmail, Web-calendaring, ease of installation/administration.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
