Toward a happy end for the Sun/XPointer saga?
Eve Maler
posted
a revised intellectual property statement that Sun has submitted to the W3C for its XPointer specification.
The new IPR
has been revised to take into account the many comments from the community on
the previous release:
Thanks to everyone who
sent comments on the XPointer terms and conditions that Sun published. We have gone through all the comments
carefully and developed the IPR statement attached below. I just submitted this to W3C.
This new
version is much shorter and appears to more clearly restrict its scope to:
patent or patent application
that would necessarily be infringed upon implementation of XPointer
and excludes:
enabling technologies
that may be necessary to make or use any product or portion thereof that
complies with XPointer but are not themselves expressly set forth in XPointer
(e.g., semiconductor manufacturing technology, compiler technology, object
oriented technology, basic operating system technology, and the like)
As the
language of this text is somewhat obscure to non-lawyers, Andrew Watt suggested creating
an explanation in plain English:
Is there a translation
into English? That could be very useful.
Other
stories:
Re: Toward a happy end for the Sun/XPointer saga? (Guy Macon - 10:52, 20 May 2003) I, too, would like a translation into English. I couldn't figure out what the lawyers are saying.
Guy Macon, electrical engineer
http://www.guymacon.com/FUN/QUESTION/INDEX.HTM |