[whatwg] Copyright of specifications
jim.ley at gmail.com
Sat Aug 28 03:39:47 PDT 2004
On Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:20:11 +0000 (UTC), Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Aug 2004, Jim Ley wrote:
> > No it wasn't, you mentioned at least twice on seperate occasions on
> > this mailing list.
> Allow me to rephrase. During legal discussions at Opera, the suggestion of
> public domain was only brought up briefly during an unminutted meeting,
> and was very quickly dismissed as unworkable by the people who know such
According the archive, that is what you asked the Opera lawyers, now
all of a sudden it was only raised in a discussion? So what was it
that you originally asked the Opera lawyers, if it wasn't to get the
document assigned to the Public Domain?
> They _are_ "our" lawyers, I'm an Opera employee even in a WHATWG context.
Yes, and when you act on behalf of one organisation, you are acting on
behalf of that organisation, and not the other. So when acting for
the WHAT-WG, you are not an Opera representative - you made this
extremely clear in the previous discussions.
If this has now changed and your participation in the WHAT-WG is as a
representative of Opera (ie it's not just a number of individuals, but
companies with representatives) then that material change really
should've been mentioned.
> > can you ask for an _urgent_ response, after all 2 months is already
> > extremely negligent time for what you've described as being very
> > simple issues.
> No, sorry.
Could you explain why not?
> > Would you also please request that you are allowed to post their
> > response to the mailing list?
Could you explain why not?
> > Who is the WHAT-WG member responsible then? Can you please get them to
> > pull their finger out...
> Since you can't remain civil about this
I'm sorry, I understand "pull their finger out" as a perfectly civil
phrase, Apologies I must remember you have expressed different views
to a number of my phrases, and I'll try to limit my language to what
you see as reasonable.
I await the individual concerned respsonse about the Patent delays.
> I didn't say I didn't have advice in writing.
No, I know, I asked you to confirm to me that you did - something
you've still not done - can you confirm to me that the licence given
to the WHAT-WG and others to use and re-licence Opera copyright
material is something you have in writing and would be producible in
any future court case rising from Opera (or future owners of its
content) revoking the licence?
> This may surprise you but few companies set up
> open forums like WHATWG if they are not in their own best interests.
Of course not, but Operas current best interest may not be Operas best
interest once Nokia has bought them, or once following an IPO its even
then shareholders, I don't have a problem with Opera _now_ it's just
I do not believe the current state makes any protection for the
More information about the whatwg