[Fiware-legal] FIGARE GES LEGAL NOTICE.

[Schweppe, Kathrin]

Dear Luis, dear all,

please find attached SAP comments.

We unfortunately disagree with Suzanne’s comments, because a clear statement about the included patent rights might create a legal certainty for the End-User.

With regard to the requests to include the terms Background and Sideground, we respect Siemens’ and Ericsson’s wish to protect Background and Sideground, however, the terms Background and Sideground are closely tied to the Consortium Agreements of EU FP7 Projects and might confuse an End-User. We should not forget, that an End-User is someone, who is not partner in FI-ware or the FI-PPP and therefore is not able to identify Background of a partner.

Best regards,
Kathrin

Kathrin Schweppe, LL.M.
Legal Counsel
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, Lars Dahlgaard
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.



From: fiware-legal-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu [mailto:fiware-legal-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] On Behalf Of LUIS GARCIA GARCIA
Sent: Dienstag, 19. Juni 2012 08:31
To: fiware-legal at lists.fi-ware.eu
Cc: JOSE JIMENEZ DELGADO
Subject: Re: [Fiware-legal] FIGARE GES LEGAL NOTICE.

Dear all,

We fully support Suzanne approach as the better way to move forward with this legal notice. We cannot forget that the objective is to get the legal notice within this week.

Existing obligations under CA, GA and Collaboration Agreement - regarding Access Rights-  are in place, whatever is the final text of the legal notice.

  I believe we have to go back to the essential.   We have to provide a Legal Notice that has to comply with what we say in our CA:

“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 may, subject to additional conditions or agreement where
requested by a Party/ the Parties (provided that the right to obtain Access
Rights granted under this Agreement must not be negatively affected by such
request),develop and release implementations of the FI-WARE Generic
Enabler Specifications on a royalty-free basis.”

From my point of view, this clearly mandates to give away any patent claim on implementations of FI-WARE Generic Enabler specifications, and the distinction about Background, Sideground or Foreground is not relevant here.   Otherwise, tell me how we can comply with the CA, with the provisions of the Grant Agreement and, very specially, with one of the main idea of this project: to foster implementations using FI-WARE GES.

It is rather clear that we shouldn't claim royalties of any kind, derived from patents or not, to a company that implements a product that is in compliance with FI-WARE Open Specifications.

As Suzanne says: “  Experienced license drafters, such as the Object Management Group (OMG), did not include a specific patent grant in Legal Notices attached to the Open Specifications they publish.   So what's good for them  could be also good for us.   “

Don´t forget that OMG is one of the most recognized industry consortia publishing open specifications.   They have produced specifications linked to rather relevant standards such as CORBA, BPMN, UML, ...  We believe it is pragmatic to rely on the experience of a language that has shown it works since many years.   In this respect, the original Legal Notice is rather aligned with OMG's language.   On the other hand, many of the companies involved in FI-WARE have participated in some OMG standard, without apparently representing any big issue, and this is something worth noticing.

I do suggest to follow Suzanne and to drop this two sections from the Legal Notice. Find attached an updated draft. In parallel, if you want, we can discuss about what is in and what is out from these “essential claims” but our existing AR obligations for GES implementations exist and arise from the above mentioned legal agreements (CA, GA and Collaboration)  and are out of this legal notice.

Please let me know today if you can live with this proposal and if you agree with the rest of the proposed legal notice.

Thank you beforehand.

Best regards

Luis García García
Asesoria  Jurídica // Legal Department
Tfnos: +34 914832614 //  +34913129666
Telefónica Investigación y Desarrollo, S.A.Unipersonal
DISTRITO C- Edificio Oeste 1,  5ª planta
Ronda de la Comunicación s/n
28050-Madrid (España)

[cid:image001.jpg at 01CD4E06.F4D7DC10]





-----Mensaje original-----
De: Suzanne Erez [mailto:SUZANNE at il.ibm.com]
Enviado el: lunes, 18 de junio de 2012 16:42
Para: LUIS GARCIA GARCIA
CC: fiware-legal at lists.fi-ware.eu; PILAR PLASENCIA MAESO; JUAN JOSE HIERRO SUREDA; JOSE JIMENEZ DELGADO; Yaron Wolfsthal
Asunto: Fw: FIGARE GES LEGAL NOTICE.


Luis, let me suggest a way to go forward.
I would suggest to leave out completely the 2 sections marked in yellow.
IBM believes that the grant as stated in the CA is fully expressed in the license WITHOUT the sections marked in yellow.


IBM believes that the sections in yellow, while in principle a good idea to include, must be carefully drafted and negotiated in order to be not too broad, or not too narrow or not unclear.


With this specific patent grant, the IP of our corporations is involved.
The risk is that much higher. With so many parties, there would be endless interests and input (and endless multi-lawyer conference calls...). It could take us weeks just to negotiate these two sections highlighted in yellow.


I note that experienced license drafters, such as the Object Management Group (OMG), did not include a specific patent grant in their language. So what's good for them (as Juanjo pointed out...) could be also good for us.


I vote to use the license just the way it is, but WITHOUT the two sections in yellow. This will make our lives easier and we can be in the road immediately. what do you think?


Suzanne


Suzanne Erez
Counsel, IPLaw, Israel
Associate PPM, PPM 150, 160
IBM Haifa, Israel      suzanne at il.ibm.com<mailto:suzanne at il.ibm.com>
Tel:  972-4-829-6069  Fax:  972-4-829-6521

I am a kind of paranoiac in reverse. I suspect people of plotting to make me happy. - J.D. Salinger, writer (1919-2010)

PREPARED BY IBM ATTORNEY / PRIVILEGE REVIEW REQUIRED   This e-mail and its
attachments, if any, may contain information that is private, confidential, or protected by attorney-client, solicitor-client or other privilege. If you received this e-mail in error, please delete it from your system without copying it and notify me of the misdirection by reply e-mail.
----- Forwarded by Suzanne Erez/Haifa/IBM on 18/06/2012 05:16 PM -----

Subject: FIGARE GES LEGAL NOTICE.


    Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 08:30:19 +0200

    From: LUIS GARCIA GARCIA <lgg at tid.es>

      To: fiware-legal at lists.fi-ware.eu<mailto:fiware-legal at lists.fi-ware.eu> <fiware-legal at lists.fi-ware.eu<mailto:fiware-legal at lists.fi-ware.eu>>

      CC: PILAR PLASENCIA MAESO <pmaeso at tid.es<mailto:pmaeso at tid.es>>, JUAN JOSE HIERRO SUREDA <jhierro at tid.es<mailto:jhierro at tid.es>>, JOSE JIMENEZ DELGADO <jimenez at tid.es<mailto:jimenez at tid.es>>





Dear all,

Find enclosed the new draft of the Legal Notice that must govern the FI-WARE Generic Enabler Specification (FI-WARE GES). The current proposed Legal Notice is very much based on the Legal Notice that the Object Management Group (OMG), a widely recognized industry standard body author of widely used standards such as UML, BPMN and CORBA

In it, we´ve taken into account the inputs received. The objective is to create a unique text applicable to all the FIWARE GES. In this unique Legal Notice it will  figure the Copyright notice of the relevant FIWARE Partners creating this GES.

We kindly ask you to focus the debate exclusively in the yellow marked paragraphs referred to the “Essential patents and the licenses granted to them. Regarding these paragraphs, we wonder whether their inclusion may be against the clauses of our CA which establish that any party should be able to implement products in compliance with FI-WARE GE Specifications
royalty-free:

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

To some extend, the proposed language says "don't worry, you will not be sued by us because infringing a essential patent" but, on the other hand, it may be interpreted by someone as implicitly supporting the idea that "we could ask you for royalties if you infringe a patent we could consider non-essential" ... wouldn't claiming for any patent be something against the clause in the CA ?  We would like to gather your opinion to close the Legal Notice.

Based on comments and results of the discussion, we will propose a final language by Thursday, so if you have any opinion on the matter, please let us know by Tuesday evening at the latest.

Best regards

Luis García García
Asesoria  Jurídica // Legal Department
Tfnos: +34 914832614 //  +34913129666
Telefónica Investigación y Desarrollo, S.A.l DISTRITO C- Edificio Oeste 1,  5ª planta Ronda de la Comunicación s/n 28050-Madrid (España)










Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo electrónico en el enlace situado más abajo.
This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at.
http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx(See attached file:
attw4e4x.dat)(See attached file: fi-ware Legal notice 18th june.doc)


  ________________________________
Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo electrónico en el enlace situado más abajo.
This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at
http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-legal/attachments/20120619/2122db99/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 4050 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-legal/attachments/20120619/2122db99/attachment.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: fi-ware Legal notice 18th june with SAP comments.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 22691 bytes
Desc: fi-ware Legal notice 18th june with SAP comments.docx
URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-legal/attachments/20120619/2122db99/attachment.docx>