Michael and all,

  It is good Michael that you pointed this out (See at near bottom).
However I believe that NSF already transferred the A.ROOT-SERVER.NET
to NSI some time ago (1996-97??)  I believe that Tony Rutkowski
pointed this out quite awhile ago.  I am sure that Don T or Chris Clough

can most likely verify this one way or another.  Hence, if correct,
transfer
of A.ROOT-SERVER.NET to ICANN is strictly in NSI's hands as NSI
is the current manager of that Root server.
Tech Contact: Kosters, Mark A. Handle: MAK21 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Michael Sondow wrote:

> Commentary of James Love (Consumer Project on Technology) on HR 209
> and S804:
>
> >         HR 209 passed the House of Representatives
> >         by voice vote on Tuesday, May 11.
> >
> >         S. 804 is the verison introduced by Senators
> >         Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) and William Frist (R-TN)
> >
> >         The legislation undermines the public's
> >         rights in government funded inventions,
> >         increases secrecy, and reduces competition.
>
> > Senator John McCain
> > Senator Jay Rockefeller
> > Senator Byron Dorgan
> > Senator John Durkin
> > Senator Patrick Leahy
> > Senator William Frist
> >
> > Dear Senators:
> >
> > We are writing to express opposition to HR 209 and S. 804.
> > The  fundamental thrust of the legislation is to water down or
> > eliminate a range of current public interest protections in the
> > licensing of taxpayer funded inventions.
> >
> > 1.   The legislation reduces competition
> >
> > Both HR 209 and S. 804 eliminate the statutory requirements in 35
> > USC 209(c)(1)(b) that before using an exclusive license, an
> > agency make a finding that:
> >
> >      the desired practical application has not been achieved, or
> >      is not likely expeditiously to be achieved, under any
> >      nonexclusive license which has been granted, or which may be
> >      granted, on the invention;
> >
> > This is an important change in existing law.  It is currently
> > illegal to use an exclusive license if development is likely to
> > be expeditiously achieved with a non-exclusive license.  However,
> > under the new bills, this will change, and it will be possible to
> > use an exclusive license merely by meeting the much lesser
> > requirement that "granting the license is a reasonable and
> > necessary incentive to . . . promote the invention's utilization
> > by the public." The consequence of this change will be fewer non-
> > exclusive licenses, less competition, and more monopolies on
> > taxpayer owned inventions.
> >
> > 2.   The Public's rights to notice and comment on exclusive
> >      licensing of government inventions is vastly reduced
> >
> > HR 209 and S. 804 both gut public notice provisions for exclusive
> > license agreements from government owned inventions. Under
> > existing law, agencies are normally expected to provide 90 days
> > notice that the invention is available to the public for
> > licensing, followed by 60 days notice with an opportunity to file
> > objections for proposals to provide an exclusive license to a
> > particular party. [See: 37CFR404.7(a)(1)]
> >
> > S. 804 and HR 209 reduce notice requirements to "in an
> > appropriate manner at least 15 days before the license is
> > granted."  According to the House Report on HR 209, this
> > eliminates also the need to provide notice in the Federal
> > Register.  S. 804 and HR 209 exempt even this modest requirement
> > for "licensing of inventions made under a cooperative research
> > and development agreement (CRADA) entered into under section 12
> > of the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15
> > U.S.C. 3710a)."
> >
> > The change eliminates the effective rights of the public to raise
> > objections to the use of an exclusive license or to even question
> > the terms of the license (including the scope of the
> > exclusivity).
> >
> > 3.   The increased secrecy on licenses undermines the public's
> >      rights and reduces accountability.
> >
> > There are a number of current cases where the public is seeking
> > information about government licenses, including such items as
> > the royalties or other considerations paid for the license, the
> > revenues from the invention, information the availability of the
> > invention to the public, or justification for prices charged
> > consumers.
> >
> > HR 209 modifies existing statutory language to require that such
> > information be secret from the public.  Language in 35 USC
> > Section 209 that says that information "may be treated by a
> > federal agency as . . . privileged and confidential and not
> > subject to disclosure under" the freedom of information act, is
> > changed to say that such information "shall be treated as
> > privileged and confidential...."   NIH licensing officials claim
> > the change from "may" to "shall" will make a much broader amount
> > of information secret, including even basic information such as
> > the amount of money received by the government as payment for use
> > of a patent.  Indeed, in Section 10 of HR 209, federal agencies
> > are not even permitted to report statistical information on
> > royalties received for licenses, if "such information would
> > reveal the amount of royalty income associated with an individual
> > license or licensee."
> >
> > This is truly adding insult to injury.  Not only will the public
> > be denied a practical opportunity to stop an agency from giving
> > an exclusive license on a government owned patent or to
> > effectively challenge the terms of the patent     the public will
> > not even be permitted to know what the terms are!
>
> Below is part of the current US code of federal regulations on
> licensing of government owned inventions.
>
> (One thing I did not notice before is this part of the CFR:
>
>    (a)(2)
>    (i) The license shall be subject to the irrevocable, royalty-free
>    right of the Government of the United States to practice and have
>    practiced the invention on behalf of the United States and on
> behalf
>    of any foreign government or international organization pursuant
> to     any existing or future treaty or agreement with the United
> States.)
>
> ............................................
>
> Here is 37CFR404.7
>
> [Code of Federal Regulations]
> [Title 37, Volume 1]
> [Revised as of July 1, 1998]
> >From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
> [CITE: 37CFR404.7]
>
> [Page 533-534]
>
>           TITLE 37--PATENTS, TRADEMARKS, AND COPYRIGHTS
>
> CHAPTER IV--ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR TECHNOLOGY POLICY, DEPARTMENT OF
> COMMERCE
>
> PART 404--LICENSING OF GOVERNMENT OWNED INVENTIONS--Table of
> Contents
>
> Sec. 404.7  Exclusive and partially exclusive licenses.
>
>     (a)(1) Exclusive or partially exclusive domestic licenses may be
> granted on federally owned inventions three months after notice of
> the
> invention's availability has been announced in the Federal Register,
> or
> without such notice where the Federal agency determines that
> expeditious
> granting of such a license will best serve the interest of the
> Federal
> Government and the public; and in either situation, only if;
>     (i) Notice of a prospective license, identifying the invention
> and
> the prospective licensee, has been published in the Federal
> Register,
> providing opportunity for filing written objections within a 60-day
> period;
>     (ii) After expiration of the period in Sec. 404.7(a)(1)(i) and
> consideration of any written objections received during the period,
> the
> Federal agency has determined that;
>     (A) The interests of the Federal Government and the public will
> best
> be served by the proposed license, in view of the applicant's
> intentions, plans, and ability to bring the invention to practical
> application or otherwise promote the invention's utilization by the
> public;
>     (B) The desired practical application has not been achieved, or
> is
> not likely expeditiously to be achieved, under any nonexclusive
> license
> which has been granted, or which may be granted, on the invention;
>     (C) Exclusive or partially exclusive licensing is a reasonable
> and
> necessary incentive to call forth the investment of risk capital and
> expenditures to bring the invention to practical application or
> otherwise promote the invention's utilization by the public; and
>     (D) The proposed terms and scope of exclusivity are not greater
> than
> reasonably necessary to provide the incentive for bringing the
> invention
> to practical application or otherwise promote the invention's
> utilization by the public;
>     (iii) The Federal agency has not determined that the grant of
> such
> license will tend substantially to lessen competition or result in
> undue
> concentration in any section of the country in any line of commerce
> to
> which the technology to be licensed relates, or to create or
> maintain
> other situations inconsistent with the antitrust laws; and
>     (iv) The Federal agency has given first preference to any small
> business firms submitting plans that are determined by the agency to
> be
> within the capabilities of the firms and as equally likely, if
> executed,
> to bring the invention to practical application as any plans
> submitted
> by applicants that are not small business firms.
>     (2) In addition to the provisions of Sec. 404.5, the following
> terms
> and conditions apply to domestic exclusive and partially exclusive
> licenses;
>     (i) The license shall be subject to the irrevocable,
> royalty-free
> right of the Government of the United States to
>
> [[Page 534]]
>
> practice and have practiced the invention on behalf of the United
> States
> and on behalf of any foreign government or international
> organization
> pursuant to any existing or future treaty or agreement with the
> United
> States.
>     (ii) The license shall reserve to the Federal agency the right
> to
> require the licensee to grant sublicenses to responsible applicants,
> on
> reasonable terms, when necessary to fulfill health or safety needs.
>     (iii) The license shall be subject to any licenses in force at
> the
> time of the grant of the exclusive or partially exclusive license.
>     (iv) The license may grant the licensee the right of enforcement
> of
> the licensed patent pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 29 of
> Title
> 35, United States Code, or other statutes, as determined appropriate
> in
> the public interest.
>     (b)(1) Exclusive or partially exclusive licenses may be granted
> on a
> federally owned invention covered by a foreign patent, patent
> application, or other form of protection, provided that;
>     (i) Notice of a prospective license, identifying the invention
> and
> prospective licensee, has been published in the Federal Register,
> providing opportunity for filing written objections within a 60-day
> period and following consideration of such objections;
>     (ii) The agency has considered whether the interests of the
> Federal
> Government or United States industry in foreign commerce will be
> enhanced; and
>     (iii) The Federal agency has not determined that the grant of
> such
> license will tend substantially to lessen competition or result in
> undue
> concentration in any section of the United States in any line of
> commerce to which the technology to be licensed relates, or to
> create or
> maintain other situations inconsistent with antitrust laws.
>     (2) In addition to the provisions of Sec. 404.5 the following
> terms
> and conditions apply to foreign exclusive and partially exclusive
> licenses:
>     (i) The license shall be subject to the irrevocable,
> royalty-free
> right of the Government of the United States to practice and have
> practiced the invention on behalf of the United States and on behalf
> of
> any foreign government or international organization pursuant to any
> existing or future treaty or agreement with the United States.
>     (ii) The license shall be subject to any licenses in force at
> the
> time of the grant of the exclusive or partially exclusive license.
>     (iii) The license may grant the licensee the right to take any
> suitable and necessary actions to protect the licensed property, on
> behalf of the Federal Government.
>     (c) Federal agencies shall maintain a record of determinations
> to
> grant exclusive or partially exclusive licenses.

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Contact Number:  972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

Reply via email to