ACTION-29

2007-11-29 16:04:16: I forwarded it internally. Mike, feel free to re-assign this action to you. [Dan Connolly]

2007-11-29 16:05:17: oh... it= Anne's msg. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/spec-prod/2007OctDec/0006.html [Dan Connolly]

2007-11-29 16:05:43: original suggestion was:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Nov/0292.html
[Dan Connolly]

2007-12-06 05:17:55: the internal discussion is underway, but it looks like it will take a while. Anybody who needs this before end of Jan will please say so. [Dan Connolly]

2008-07-10 14:23:35: haven't heard anything since the 14 May update; I'm pinging people internally. [Dan Connolly]

2008-07-17 15:30:15: internal discussion shows progress, but it's slow. [Dan Connolly]

2008-08-14 15:35:40: internal discussion continues... it seems likely that we'll explicitly license exerpts but not modifications.

The IETF seems to be working on something similar. http://trustee.ietf.org/docs/IETF_Trust_Legal_Permission_for_IETF_Docs_8-05-08.txt [Dan Connolly]

2008-09-11 16:10:11: Henri Sivonen's reply to Chris Lilley explains his interest in a free software license: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2008Jun/0147.html [Shawn Medero]

2008-10-10 14:16:13: internal deadline pushed back [Dan Connolly]

2008-11-13 17:41:12: the internal discussion has been pushed back to: due 2008-12-10
[Dan Connolly]

2008-12-16 22:03:57: I'm pinging internally... [Dan Connolly]

2008-12-16 22:51:13: internal discussion continues... [Dan Connolly]

2009-01-14 17:31:15: working on this with Rigo, Ian, PLH, Mike, and others... Ian suggest one more week should yield some results. [Dan Connolly]

2009-02-02 22:00:49: Note Sam's report on discussion with W3C management
http://www.w3.org/mid/49876B47.8000803@intertwingly.net
[Dan Connolly]

2009-02-02 22:02:53: overtaken by Sam's discussion with PLH? [Dan Connolly]

2009-02-05 17:14:04: reassigned to Sam Ruby at 2009-02-05 call [Gregory Rosmaita]

2009-02-17 17:17:21: note use case decision meanwhile http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Feb/0321.html [Dan Connolly]

2009-09-30 09:36:31: We agreed to postpone this to November 5th. Philippe will send a status update to the group. [Maciej Stachowiak]

2009-10-07 21:23:18: Email to PSIG sent:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-psig/2009OctDec/0000.html [Philippe Le Hégaret]

2009-11-13 15:35:00: The W3C Advisory Board spent a substantial amount of this topic. I'll continue to push to get an opinion from the W3C Advisory Committee but I don't expect to get one before March 2010 unfortunately. The PSIG (Patent and Standard Interest Group) started to discuss the issue at the end of October and we got some strong pushback there, especially since we phrased the question to them as "How shouldwe do this?", instead of "Should we do this?". We're now pushing for the next PSIG meeting to be sooner rather than later. Until we can get an advise on using a license such as the MIT license, it's going to be difficult to formulate a clear question for the AC. [Philippe Le Hégaret]