[Fiware-legal] FI-WARE CONSORTIUM AGREEMENT

[Weikl, Susanne (NSN - DE/Munich)]

Hello Kathrin,

 

I have the impression that you may be looking at the wrong clause or have a misunderstanding of the clause? 

We are discussing the second paragraph of 4.1, not the third paragraph:

 

(second paragraph: Notwithstanding any conflicting terms in this CA, but subject to Annex 3 and Section 3.4.3.3,the FI-WARE Generic Enabler Specifications will be made publically available (upon publication in accordance with clause 4.4.1) on royalty free terms. For the sake of clarity, Parties signing this CA as well as any other third party, subject to - in case of a third party -   additional conditions or agreement where requested by a Party or Parties, may develop and release implementations of the FIWARE Generic Enabler Specifications on a royalty-free basis.

 

third paragraph: For further sake of clarity, Parties including those Parties that assisted in generating the FI-WARE Generic Enabler Specifications may, but are not obliged to, develop implementations or reference implementations of FIWARE Generic Enabler Specifications and request licensing terms other than open and royalty free for such, e.g. under FRAND (Fair, Reasonable and Non- Discriminatory) terms subject to the provisions of Article 4.2.3 and 4.2.4 below. The Parties may release their implementations or reference implementations as open source or closed source, at their sole discretion.)

 

 

The "may" you are referring to below does not provide any flexibility, but is a replacement for "is entitled to". I.e. there is no right to chose additional terms.

 

 

Additionally, I have the impression that we agree on the principle that the aim is to allow other terms or additional - is this correct?

 

Best Regards

 

Susanne

 

 

From: ext Schweppe, Kathrin [mailto:kathrin.schweppe at sap.com] 
Sent: Monday, September 05, 2011 2:08 PM
To: Du Besset Mathilde; robert.sarrazin at orange-ftgroup.com; Weikl, Susanne (NSN - DE/Munich); Bettina.Lehmann at telekom.de; fabian.perpeet at zv.fraunhofer.de; SUZANNE at il.ibm.com
Cc: fiware-legal at lists.fi-ware.eu; thierry.nagellen at orange-ftgroup.com; fiware-legal-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu
Subject: AW: [Fiware-legal] FI-WARE CONSORTIUM AGREEMENT

 

Dear all, 

 

SAP disagrees with the wording proposed by Orange and NSN. I have checked with our Belgian lawyers and they explained to me the following: 

 

While it is possible to conclude a contract in favor of third party beneficiaries, but it is difficult to impose obligations upon a third party beneficiary. If an obligation is put upon them, we need at least an approval of the third party beneficiary. If take the wordings, we encounter several problems: First, we have to determine who the third party beneficiaries are. As this is 'the public', we cannot single out one party and we are not able to ask the entire world for approval. The wording itself is somewhat vague so it is difficult for the Third party beneficiary to determine what obligations he can expect. Therefore, I have doubts if a third party beneficiary will agree to the wording. Further, the wording might give an impression of the possibility of to discriminate certain third parties. This might lead to further problems with Standard Bodies, which expect non-discriminatory rules. 

 

What I see as an huge advantage of the current wording is, that the term 'may' to our understanding allows us a certain flexibility. We can agree upon royalty-terms but we do not have to. We can agree upon other terms or additional terms as well. We can ask the third party directly and we are not bound by the CA to ask for royalty-free + certain conditions. I prefer flexibility towards third parties. 

 

Therefore SAP disagrees with this wording and cannot accept it. 

 

Thank you and best regards, 

Kathrin  

 

Kathrin Schweppe, LL.M. 

Contract Specialist

Global Legal

SAP AG 
Dietmar-Hopp-Allee 16 

69190 Walldorf, Germany 
T +49 6227 7-64369 
F +49 6227 78-54177
E kathrin.schweppe at sap.com <blocked::mailto:nadine.heitmann at sap.com>  

http://www.sap.com <http://www.sap.com/> 
Sitz der Gesellschaft/Registered Office: Walldorf, Germany
Vorstand/SAP Executive Board: Bill McDermot (Sprecher/Co-CEO), Jim Hagemann Snabe (Sprecher/Co-CEO), Werner Brandt, Gerhard Oswald, Vishal Sikka
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats/Chairperson of the SAP Supervisory Board: Hasso Plattner
Registergericht/Commercial Register Mannheim No HRB 350269 

Diese e-mail kann Betriebs- oder Geschäftsgeheimnisse, dem Anwaltsgeheimnis unterliegende oder sonstige vertrauliche Informationen enthalten. Sollten Sie diese e-mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, ist Ihnen eine Kenntnisnahme des Inhalts, eine Vervielfältigung oder Weitergabe der e-mail ausdrücklich untersagt. Bitte benachrichtigen Sie uns und vernichten Sie die empfangene e-mail. Vielen Dank.

Prepared by a member of SAP Global Legal. This message and any attachments may contain information that is confidential, private or protected by the attorney-client or other privilege. If you have received this email in error, please delete this message without further copying or distribution and promptly notify me. Thank you for your cooperation.

 

 

 

Von: fiware-legal-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu [mailto:fiware-legal-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] Im Auftrag von Du Besset Mathilde
Gesendet: Freitag, 2. September 2011 17:58
An: robert.sarrazin at orange-ftgroup.com; susanne.weikl at nsn.com; Bettina.Lehmann at telekom.de; fabian.perpeet at zv.fraunhofer.de; SUZANNE at il.ibm.com
Cc: fiware-legal at lists.fi-ware.eu; thierry.nagellen at orange-ftgroup.com; fiware-legal-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu
Betreff: Re: [Fiware-legal] FI-WARE CONSORTIUM AGREEMENT

 

Dear all, 

 

Technicolor supports the proposal made by NSN,  as modified  by Orange. 

 

With best regards. 

 

 

Mathilde du Besset

Legal counsel - Intellectual property

 

 

1 rue Jeanne d'Arc

92130 Issy-les-Moulineaux, France

Tel: + 33 (0)1.41.86.51.72

mathilde.dubesset at technicolor.com

 

Help preserve the color of our world - Think before you print.

 

 

 

 

De : fiware-legal-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu [mailto:fiware-legal-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] De la part de robert.sarrazin at orange-ftgroup.com
Envoyé : vendredi 2 septembre 2011 12:32
À : susanne.weikl at nsn.com; Bettina.Lehmann at telekom.de; fabian.perpeet at zv.fraunhofer.de; SUZANNE at il.ibm.com
Cc : thierry.nagellen at orange-ftgroup.com; fiware-legal at lists.fi-ware.eu; fiware-legal-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu
Objet : Re: [Fiware-legal] FI-WARE CONSORTIUM AGREEMENT

 

Dear all,

 

 If a majority of parties is Ok  with  the addition proposed by NSN , we can live with such an addition. In this latter case maybe we can precise as follows ( to avoid any doubt that additional conditions are applicable to third parties only  - if my understanding is correct  ) :

 

For the sake of clarity, Parties signing this CA as well as any other third party, subject to - in case of a third party -   additional conditions or agreement where requested by a Party_or Parties , may develop and release implementations of the FI-WARE Generic Enabler Specifications on a royalty-free basis.")

 

The current wording proposed by Telefonica can also  be accepted 

 

Best regards 

 

	
________________________________


	De : fiware-legal-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu [mailto:fiware-legal-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] De la part de Weikl, Susanne (NSN - DE/Munich)
	Envoyé : jeudi 1 septembre 2011 09:47
	À : Bettina.Lehmann at telekom.de; fabian.perpeet at zv.fraunhofer.de; SUZANNE at il.ibm.com
	Cc : fiware-legal at lists.fi-ware.eu; fiware-legal-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu
	Objet : [Fiware-legal] FI-WARE CONSORTIUM AGREEMENT

	Hello,

	In order to  facilitate the decision making:

	We have so far only heard SAP objecting to the proposal - we think that the concern can be overcome with the clarification sent out yesterday. 

	("For the sake of clarity, Parties signing this CA as well as any other third party, subject to additional conditions or agreement ____where requested by a Party____, may develop and release implementations of the FI-WARE Generic Enabler Specifications on a royalty-free basis.")

	All other Parties who responded were either of the opinion, that the addition might not necessarily be necessary or were only concerned about timing. 

	Is the conclusion correct that the majority could basically live with the addition?

	Please speak up, so that we know, whether we have a decision or not and can proceed!

	Thanks & Best Regards, 

	Susanne Weikl 

	Senior Legal Counsel
	St.-Martin-Straße 76
	41.4017
	D-80240 Munich
	Tel: +49 89 5159 36940
	Mob: +49 160 9062 7495
	Fax: +49 89 5159 44 36940
	susanne.weikl at nsn.com
	http://www.nokiasiemensnetworks.com/global/ <http://www.nokiasiemensnetworks.com/global/> 
	Think before you print 

	Nokia Siemens Networks GmbH & Co. KG
	Sitz der Gesellschaft: München / Registered office: Munich
	Registergericht: München / Commercial registry: Munich, HRA 88537
	WEEE-Reg.-Nr.: DE 52984304 

	Persönlich haftende Gesellschafterin / General Partner: Nokia Siemens Networks Management GmbH
	Geschäftsleitung / Board of Directors: Olaf Horsthemke, Dr. Hermann Rodler
	Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats / Chairman of supervisory board: Herbert Merz
	Sitz der Gesellschaft: München / Registered office: Munich
	Registergericht: München / Commercial registry: Munich, HRB 163416
	_________________________________________________________________________________
	Important Note: This e-mail and any attachment are confidential and may contain trade secrets and may also be legally privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you have received it in error, you are on notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this e-mail and any attachment from your system. If you are not the intended recipient please understand that you must not copy this e-mail or any attachment or disclose the contents to any other person. Thank you for your cooperation.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-legal/attachments/20110906/47842a79/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 4608 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-legal/attachments/20110906/47842a79/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 8759 bytes
Desc: image002.jpg
URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-legal/attachments/20110906/47842a79/attachment.jpg>