[CESG] Implementation of new CCSDS Patent Policy - ISSUES

[Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int]

Dear All,
        recovering the reading headache... I would conclude that there was 
a wrong starting point because:
a) The "ISO form" is not the "license terms".
b) The "ISO form" does not contain "license terms".

Then the CMC policy IMO is:
1) The ISO form shell be signed to start a WG or (for started WG) before 
approving the standard. 
2) The license terms are a wish and may take more time (or even never 
finalize if the patent holder has no intention of fixing prices and 
conditions too early).

Finally about patents used in more of one standard, I guess that the form 
would not need to be signed (but the patent holder should be informed) if 
there is pure referencing.
If the latter statement is not true some (CESG?) analysis to confirm the 
"no need" should be done.

Too simple?

I wish you all a nice, peaceful and religious week end
Of corse no preference for the religion and no need to ask the Pope to 
sign any form  :o) 

Gippo
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20110318/cff7a150/attachment.htm