[CESG] Implementation of new CCSDS Patent Policy - ISSUES

[Kearney, Mike W. (MSFC-EO01)]

That's exactly right Gian-Paolo.  I would hope that was what the original resolutions communicated before the email started.

To try to state it simply...  for any given patent (#XXXXXXX) the ISO declaration for only needs to be done once.  If you find it in the ISO database, you don't need to do it again.  We haven't spelled this out in the procedure, but I would guess that the framework item for a new project, when it uses a patent that is already in the database, should say "The ISO declaration form was already filled out by the patent holder for a previous (CCSDS or ISO) project.   This covers no new patented technology besides those with existing ISO forms."

Or something similar.

In the near term, we will have the WG chairs send ISO declaration forms to the Secretariat, and they will file the forms, and also submit to the ISO database for our CCSDS teams.  That way we can always go check and see what the CCSDS patent history is.  We will discuss in the future if we need (and can afford) a dedicated online CCSDS ISO patent declaration database.

   -=- Mike

Mike Kearney
NASA MSFC EO-01
256-544-2029


From: Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int [mailto:Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int]
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2011 5:42 AM
To: Kearney, Mike W. (MSFC-EO01)
Cc: Hooke, Adrian J (9000); CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG Exec; cesg-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org; Shames, Peter M
Subject: RE: [CESG] Implementation of new CCSDS Patent Policy - ISSUES


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/20110318/316a9545/attachment.htm