<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Segoe UI Symbol";
panose-1:2 11 5 2 4 2 4 2 2 3;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Myriad Set Pro";
panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">+1<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">As I recall from the original IPR discussions, it was mainly the browsers who insisted we adopt an IPR for the Forum. I remember there was discussion of a “participation”
type IPR, such as the W3C model, and there was some hesitation on whether or not we could keep adequate records (minutes, drafts, and votes on ballots) to be able to track who participated, and who did not.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">So two threshold questions (mainly for the browsers):
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">(1) Did you oppose a W3C-type participation IPR when the Forum first adopted its current IPR? If so, do you remember why?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D">(2) Would you now favor moving to a W3C-type participation IPR?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> vfournier@apple.com [mailto:vfournier@apple.com]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, June 1, 2016 10:51 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Peter Bowen <pzb@amzn.com><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Kirk Hall <Kirk.Hall@entrust.com>; Govreform@cabforum.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [cabf_governance] Next steps Governance Working Group<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">If we are going to consider a participation-based model, I would again suggest looking at the W3C Patent Policy. Section 3 addresses this issue:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black"> </span><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black"><a href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/">http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/</a></span><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">No point in reinventing the wheel, especially since the CAB Forum IP policy is substantially based on the W3C Patent Policy.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"><br>
<br>
</span><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">Best regards,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">Virginia Fournier<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">Senior Standards Counsel<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Myriad Set Pro",serif;color:#5E5E5E"></span><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black"> Apple Inc.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI Symbol",sans-serif;color:black">☏</span><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black"> 669-227-9595<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI Symbol",sans-serif;color:black">✉</span><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black">︎ <a href="mailto:vmf@apple.com">vmf@apple.com</a></span><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#4787FF"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Jun 1, 2016, at 9:14 AM, Peter Bowen <<a href="mailto:pzb@amzn.com">pzb@amzn.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal">On Jun 1, 2016, at 6:45 AM, Kirk Hall <<a href="mailto:Kirk.Hall@entrust.com">Kirk.Hall@entrust.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
Toward the end of the governance discussion, Ryan said that one reason Google voted against the Code Signing ballot was because of our current IPR which applies whether a CABF Member participates on an issue or not. If I understood correctly, Google might
have abstained on the ballot if we had an IPR that only requires disclosure of IP if a member actually participates in a guideline, etc.<br>
<br>
Some of the Governance Working Group proposals to spin off sub-groups (like Code Signing, Document Signing, etc.) were proposed to allow each subgroup to adopt its own IPR, etc. – but any final product will have to come back to the Forum for a ballot and adoption
(unless we let Working Groups adopt their own guidelines, without final Forum action).<o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
I think this is the simplest solution. The Forum approves the creation of Working Groups, including their charter, and then the WG operates autonomously, including voting for adoption.<br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal">If we modify the Forum’s IPR so it becomes “participation only”, I wonder if that will greatly simplify the rest of the work of this committee. Maybe the spinoffs, separate IPR policies, etc. won’t be necessary. Remember, we already allow
non-CAs and non-browsers to fully participate in Working Groups, so we are already allowing greater involvement at the Working Group level.<br>
<br>
Should we take another look at the Forum’s IPR as part of the governance discussion?<o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
I think at least changing when the IPR applies has to be part of the governance discussion. Maybe it needs to apply to WG members when the WG adopts a final WG guideline.<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Peter<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Govreform mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Govreform@cabforum.org">Govreform@cabforum.org</a><br>
<a href="https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/govreform">https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/govreform</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>