We reviewed the minutes of the last meeting.
Anish introduced rev 3 of the summary doc
Patrick: no reference to rights. Others: in a flat model, the rights can be directly derived from those granted (via obligations)
Patrick: is the list of roles complete?
What about EG members' rights to do "R&D"?
Anish: the table covers final specs
Patrick: we can't ignore non-final. Need a separate table.
Patrick: what about the special rights to Spec Leads (for "deriviative works"?)
Anish: that's covered in the More Details section.
The Spec Lead is just an Implementer, and should get exactly the same rights - no more, no less
SteveH: give time to review docs before meetings.
Patrick: agreed - I should have held off the document since Anish gave it to me just before the meeting.
We then discussed the Standard Licenses portion of the second IBM presentation.
Patrick asked how we could discuss the outbound obligations to license the RI and TCK without considering the associated inbound grants as they relate to these components. (IBM's proposed "flat IP flow" model addresses only the Spec and explicitly excludes reference to the RI and TCK.)
Two possible alternatives were suggested:
1) Inbound grants should be made under whatever terms the Spec Lead has chosen for the outbound license.
2) A single set of inbound terms could be constructed that would be flexible enough to enable all possible outbound licenses.
Anish and Patrick expressed concerns with both of these approaches, but no resolution was reached. The discussion will be continued during the next meeting.