[cabf_governance] Off-topic: Definition of "Participate"

[Virginia Fournier]

I thought you were looking for a definition of “participate”?  This defines a “participant” - from Section 3.1:

"As a condition of participating in a Working Group, each participant (W3C Members, W3C Team members, invited experts, and members of the public) shall agree to make available under W3C RF licensing requirements <http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/#def-RF> any Essential Claims <http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/#def-essential> related to the work of that particular Working Group." 

Best regards,

Virginia Fournier
Senior Standards Counsel
 Apple Inc.
☏ 669-227-9595
✉︎ vmf at apple.com <mailto:vmf at apple.com>





On Jun 6, 2016, at 12:13 PM, Ben Wilson <ben.wilson at digicert.com> wrote:

So, in section 3.2, where it says, “Only the affirmative act of joining a Working Group, or otherwise agreeing to the licensing terms described here, will obligate a Member to the W3C RF licensing commitments. Mere Membership in W3C alone, without other factors, does not give rise to the RF licensing obligation under this policy.”?
  <>
From: vfournier at apple.com <mailto:vfournier at apple.com> [mailto:vfournier at apple.com <mailto:vfournier at apple.com>] 
Sent: Monday, June 6, 2016 1:06 PM
To: Ben Wilson <ben.wilson at digicert.com <mailto:ben.wilson at digicert.com>>
Cc: member-psig at w3.org <mailto:member-psig at w3.org>
Subject: Re: Off-topic: Definition of "Participate"
 
Hi Ben,
 
The definition of “participant” that triggers the licensing obligation is in Section 3.1 of the W3C Patent Policy.






Best regards,
 
Virginia Fournier
Senior Standards Counsel
 Apple Inc.
☏ 669-227-9595
✉︎ vmf at apple.com <mailto:vmf at apple.com>
 
 
 

 
On Jun 6, 2016, at 11:55 AM, Ben Wilson <ben.wilson at digicert.com <mailto:ben.wilson at digicert.com>> wrote:
 
This is slightly off-topic, but does the W3C have a definition for “participate in a Working Group” or “participant in a Working Group”?  I’m asking because I’m looking at revising the CA/Browser Forum’s IPR Policy (which used the W3C as a model) from a membership-based model back to a working-group-participation model, and I couldn’t find anything with the review of W3C documents.  (FWIW, I would be suggesting replacement of current language in the CABF’s IPR Policy so that it says “As a condition of CAB Forum participation, each CAB Forum Participant shall, …” and  replacing the definition for “Participant”, which currently reads “entities and their Affiliates that are members of the CAB Forum”.)
Thanks in advance,
Ben 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://cabforum.org/pipermail/govreform/attachments/20160606/9bfb80ac/attachment-0001.html