Re: DAML+OIL submission to W3C (copyright/patent)

From: Deborah McGuinness (
Date: 10/18/01

thx for the work.
is there a specific copyright form that is the one we should be signing?
i am ready to sign personally and I think we all agreed that we will sign

i think the trickier question is point 5 below - how does an organization
figure out if it needs to be added?
if you/ the lucent lawyer think it is ok to just go in with lucent, then i
think we should try for that option if it will work.


"Peter F. Patel-Schneider" wrote:

> IANADL (or any other kind of lawyer, assuming that there are any other
> kinds), but I think that we will have to do at least the following:
> 1/ Change editors to authors in the documents, and thus to deny authorship
>    to those not on the author list.  Does anyone want to be added to the
>    author list for any of the documents?
> 2/ Add the data files as appendices to some document, so that they can be
>    covered under the copyright for the document.  I suggest daml+oil.daml
>    gets added to the reference manual and that daml+oil-ex*.* get added to
>    the walkthrough.
> 3/ Get copyright releases from all authors.  If you want to be an author, I
>    will need a copyright release from you.
> 4/ Get an IP statement from Lucent.
> 5/ Get IP statements from any other organization that feels that they need
>    to be added.  (I'm willing to go ahead with just the Lucent one.)
> I think that this covers it.  Does anyone have any additions?  Is there any
> chance that something less onerous would work?
> peter

 Deborah L. McGuinness
 Knowledge Systems Laboratory
 Gates Computer Science Building, 2A Room 241
 Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-9020
 (voice) 650 723 9770    (stanford fax) 650 725 5850   (computer fax)  801 705

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/02/02 EST