[dsdl-discuss] Re: Papers for Philadelphia meeting

Rick.
> I wonder if this means
> that the "rationale" text for DSDL parts need to be couched in the
> broadest terms possible, to limit
> the opportunities for IPR-squatting.

I'll try to bear this in mind when I next get around to updating Part 1.

You may like to note that this is not just an SC34 issue. SC29 have recently
raised this with JTC1 re one of their standards. Attached you will find the
slides the UK prepared for a presentation to the JTC1 Plenary in Singapore
earlier this year, curtesy of Francis Cave (thanks Francis)

Martin

----- Original Message -----
From: "Francis Cave" <francis@franciscave.com>
To: "Martin Bryan" <martin@is-thought.co.uk>
Cc: "Ann Wrightson" <awrightson@hedra.com>
Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2003 12:42 AM
Subject: RE: [dsdl-discuss] Re: Papers for Philadelphia meeting

> One of the UK representatives on SC 29 (Kate Grant) made a presentation on
> IPR issues at the recent JTC 1 Plenary in Singapore. There is considerable
> unhappiness in SC 29 concerning the lack of systems for researching and
> recording IPR/patent claims prior to the publication of standards, and
this
> appears to have prompted some action from JTC 1. Jim Mason should know
more
> about this, assuming he was in Singapore.
>
> I attach a copy of Kate Grant's presentation for your information.
>
> Francis
>
>

--
DSDL members discussion list
To unsubscribe, please send a message with the
command  "unsubscribe" to dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org
(mailto:dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org?Subject=unsubscribe)