Re: [nc-budget] Intellectual Property Agreement

[Nilda Vany Martinez Grajales <vany@sdnp.org.pa>]

Peter:

Peter de Blanc wrote:

> Louis:
>
> I believe there will be a few problems with your concept statement in
> the last paragraph.
>
> It my be well and good to set out what you (ICANN) wants, but I have the
> feeling that unilaterally proposed contracts will not work in this
> situation.
>
> Paragraphs 2 and 3 would require that AFNIC enter into contracts, and
> compensate those with whom it enters into such contracts, now and
> forever, in order to transfer title to the IP to ICANN to be used on a
> no-cost basis.

> It is not AFNIC's responsibility to secure rights from employees or
> consultants who developed IP independent from their paid duties and
> outside of their job descriptions at AFNIC.

The one that provided services to DNSO was AFNIC.  Never the DNSO hired,
contracted, accepted, specified, or was aware that
DNSO was receiving services directly from consultants or employees in
personal title regarding Secretariat and Internet Services.

Every service done for DNSO regarding Secretariat and Internet services was
done in behalf of AFNIC (including voting software).

> Perhaps negotiation is in order here. You are speaking (and attempting
> to contract for) rights that AFNIC does not own.

And then why all software are then inside the servers of AFNIC?


> Let's talk informally in Los Angeles.

Of course.

Best Regards
Vany


> Peter de Blanc
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-nc-budget@dnso.org [mailto:owner-nc-budget@dnso.org] On
> Behalf Of Louis Touton
> Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 7:33 PM
> To: nc-budget@dnso.org; Philip Sheppard
> Cc: Theresa Swinehart
> Subject: [nc-budget] Intellectual Property Agreement
> To the NC Budget Committee,
>
> Following up on the committee's discussion of the intellectual property
> rights that DNSO/ICANN should receive in the materials AFNIC has
> generated in its performance of DNSO secretariat services, I have
> prepared the attached Intellectual Property Agreement.  As you will
> note, the agreement is simple, having a body that is only two pages
> long.  Its principal features are:
>
>    1.  DNSO/ICANN would obtain a complete transfer of all of AFNIC's
> rights in the materials on the DNSO web site.  (Exhibit A to the
> agreement is a listing of all URLs on the web site, but has been
> shortened in the attached document for your convenience in reviewing
> it.)  With respect to materials prepared by AFNIC personnel and
> consultants, AFNIC would warrant that title to the intellectual property
> is being conveyed to DNSO/ICANN.  With respect to other materials
> (mainly public comments), AFNIC would simply transfer whatever rights it
> has without a warranty of title.  This transfer should permit DNSO/ICANN
> to continue to support its consensus-based policy-development activities
> in the domain-name area.
>
>    2.  DNSO/ICANN would obtain a perpetual, no-further-cost license to
> all custom (i.e. not publicly available) software that AFNIC uses in
> carrying out the DNSO secretariat functions.  This allows all future
> secretariats the benefit of this software should they choose to use it.
>
>    3.  DNSO/ICANN would enter the agreement only with AFNIC, not with
> AFNIC's employees and consultants who have prepared the materials.  It
> is AFNIC's responsibility to obtain the necessary rights from those
> employees and consultants.
>
> I believe that the above, simple agreement is a reasonable accommodation
> of the various views of the committee, as well as being fair to AFNIC.
> It fittingly provides that AFNIC, upon being compensated for its
> services, transfers to DNSO/ICANN the material that has been generated
> during those services as well as the software to continue performing
> those services.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Louis Touton

--
Nilda Vany Martinez Grajales
Information Technology Specialist
Sustainable Development Networking Programme/Panama
e-mail: vany@sdnp.org.pa
http://www.sdnp.org.pa