[cabfpub] question about patent-free guidelines

[Dimitris Zacharopoulos]

On 3/11/2016 7:56 μμ, Gervase Markham wrote:
> Hi Dimitris,
>
> On 03/11/16 17:39, Dimitris Zacharopoulos via Public wrote:
>> If the guidelines allow for a number of options to perform a specific
>> task,
> Your thoughts are good ones, but unfortunately we've not got to the
> stage where they are applicable :-(((
>
> The stages we need are these, IMO:
>
> * Agree what the ballot process is
> * Run ballots 180-182 (2 months+)
> * Receive Exclusion Notices for 182 (at least)
> * Form a PAG
>
> Once we have the PAG, we then have the discussion about what to do about
> the fact that some of the methods are encumbered and some are not. At
> that point, feel free to join the PAG and re-state your point :-)
>
> Gerv
>

Well, my question was not intended to interfere with the other threads 
regarding the current ballots or the sequence of events that have to 
take place. I was more curious if there is a clear understanding among 
members whether or not the requirements MUST be free of patents. So far, 
I didn't read something in the Bylaws or the IPR policy that suggest 
that the CA/B Forum is required to produce patent-free guidelines but, I 
am sure members more familiar with legal language will correct me if I'm 
wrong :-)
AFAIK only the actual documents are licensed under the Creative Commons 
Attribution 4.0 International license.

It would be interested to learn two things:

 1. whether it is dictated in the bylaws or the IPR policy that the CA/B
    Forum must produce patent-free guidelines (otherwise it is probably
    allowed to include some patented solutions, among others with
    royalty-free license)
 2. hear if members feel that all guidelines should cover methods and
    practices that are patent-free or not.


Dimitris.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20161103/5bbd9990/attachment-0003.html>