Re: [legalxml-econtracts] Patent Post and eContracts TC Proposal

Glad to see you getting involved.  Jason - 
would you please forward to Kelly (via the list) a copy of your 
presentation?  

 

Based on this assessment, we should create an 
agenda item to discuss dealing with the patent language impact.  Given the 
LegalXML IP language, it would seem we'll need to seek a way to draft around the 
claims of the patent, but I'm no patent expert and so we'll need to get people 
involved in the discussion who can guide us.  

 

Based on the update from the structural markup 
sub-committee and from Rolly, it sounds as though we are on track for a TC 
meeting next week.  I'll ask Dr. Leff to post a meeting notice and agenda, 
accordingly.  Apologies to anybody who signed on last week to discover the 
meeting had been postponed, as per the notice to our TC list.  

 

Thanks very much,

 - Dan Greenwood, eContracts TC 
Chair.

  
----- Original Message ----- 

  
From: 
   

  
To: Daniel Greenwood 

  
Cc:  
  

  
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 2:57 
  AM

  
Subject: Re: [legalxml-econtracts] Patent 
  Post and eContracts TC Proposal

  

I've taken a look at the 
  claims and yes they will impact the work of this TC as well as the work of 
  work by other OASIS, W3C and other organizations working on standards like 
  LegalXML-Legislative, EPAL, etc. 

I've forwarded the information on to several vendors in the Contract 
  Management space, content publishing space, and business rules engine space as 
  well as other solution providers who have worked on compliance systems that 
  create rules around legal and contractual rights as well as some international 
  people who have been working in the field of legal rights expression for many 
  years so that the PTO can be provided with sufficient prior art to try to 
  block the patent.  However, other than 2 specific companies, who have 
  their attorneys looking at the application, I have not gotten an update on 
  their responsive actions. 

I read 
  the language to refer to as contractual terms overriding legislation.   
  Many jurisdictions will allow and enforce contract terms that provide for 
  special arrangements between the parties even though the baseline law may 
  provide otherwise.  For example, most states have statutes governing the 
  award of attorneys' fees, but the contract can provide its own terms with 
  regard to attorneys' fees and have that arrangement enforced rather than the 
  legislation.  You see this alot in choice of law provisions, choice of 
  forum provisions, warranty provisions, arbitration provisions, limitation of 
  recovery, etc.   

I'm coming a 
  little late into the game, but would like to get a copy of the New Orleans 
  presentation and some other documents to get me up-to-speed on where the TC is 
  on its specifications as well so that I might can help close the gap from a 
  resource perspective in contributing from my background as a 15 year attorney 
  who flipped to IT to support the development of systems to enable lawyers in 
  legal departments and law firms. 

Thanks, 
Kelly D. Ray
Senior 
  Manager
Advisory Services
PricewaterhouseCoopers

(home office) 
  972-881-2420
(voicemail/fax) 214-853-4264
(cell) 
  972-896-5834


Local Office:
2001 Ross Ave., 
  Suite 1800
Dallas, TX  75201

Home Office:
320 Hawthorne 
  Dr.
Murphy, Tx  75094

  
    
    

      "Daniel Greenwood" 
        <> 
        
07/02/2004 09:21 AM 

        
          
          

            
              
Please respond 
              to
"Daniel Greenwood" 
        <>

      
        
          
          

            
              
To

            <> 
          

            
              
cc

            
          

            
              
Subject

            [legalxml-econtracts] 
              Patent Post and eContracts TC Proposal

        
          
          

            
            

John Messing posted a link and abstract to a recent patent 
  covering
"legality expression".  I wonder if anybody on the list has 
  heard of this
one or has any idea what it is supposed to cover and how 
  relevent it is (or
isn't) to this TC (or LegalXML in general).  On the 
  topic, I came upon an
interesting phrase after scrolling through the claims 
  at random.  It seems
to provide a mechanism for contracts language to 
  "override" other laws (in
the example given, the contract appears to trump 
  an export law prohibiting
sales of a Monkees episode).  My burning 
  question is: what the heck is that
episode about and why was it prohibited 
  for export?  And also, why would the
PTO grant a patent to technology 
  that enables contracts to trump law when
that violates basic jurisprudence 
  of the USA and other common law countries?
I include the snip from the 
  patent below.

Regarding the TC, I suggest it is time for some closure 
  on the structural
markup proposal.  So, I would like to solicit 
  comments or ideas on how and
when to achieve an votable submission on 
  structural markup.  To get the ball
rolling, here is one idea: that 
  the subcommittee submit to the whole TC
whatever it has agreed upon and 
  whatever it has not (ideally, in the form of
options) and that the TC 
  appoint another group to cobble together a draft
based on that submission. 
   While the other group will not be as familiar
with the problems and 
  prospects, at least it will have fresh eyes and a
deadline.  The TC as 
  a whole will then have a chance to debate, amend as
needed, and finally 
  vote upon a bounded and complete proposal.

Also - can somebody please 
  e-mail me with an update on the status of the
Requirements Document? 
   Rolly?  Others?

Thanks,
- Dan Greenwood

[0260] In 
  an exemplary embodiment, a contract that overrides the law, for
example, 
  can be given by:

[0261] "a) Amazon may sell `The Monkees` 
  episodes,

[0262] b) All sales of `The Monkees. The Time Machine` 
  episode outside of
the U.S. are prohibited,

[0263] c) Amazon chooses 
  to sell the episode outside of the U.S."

[0264] Accordingly, it is a 
  policy of Amazon that the clause 212 for selling
"The Monkees" episodes is 
  preferable to the clause 212 for banning sales of
"The Monkees: The Time 
  Machine" episode outside of the U.S. The exemplary
policy/claim combination 
  can be expressed using the exemplary Contract
Expression Language, for 
  example, as given by:

32 <policy> <claim> 
  <clause
licenseIdRef="licenseForSellingTheMonkeesEpsisodes"/> 
  <precede/> <clause
licenseIdRef="interdictForSellingTheM- 
  onkees-TheTimeMachineEpsisode"/>
</claim> +<signer 
  licensePartId="Amazon"> </policy>

----- Original Message 
  -----
From: "John Messing" <>
To: "Dr. 
  Laurence Leff" <>
Cc: 
  <>
Sent: Monday, June 21, 
  2004 11:56 PM
Subject: RE: [legalxml-econtracts] Agenda for upcoming 
  meeting from the
OASIS Legal XML Member Section Electronic Contracts 
  Technical Committee
Secretary (File id: @@2398)

> NOTICE OF 
  POSSIBLE PATENT CLAIMS
>
> United States Patent Application 
  20040049462, Assignee: ContentGuard,
viewable online at the US Patent 
  website
> 
  at
>
>
http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2F
netahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PG01&s1=20040049462
.PGNR.&OS=DN/20040049462&RS=DN/20040049462
>
> 
  System and method for specifying and processing legality 
  expressions
>
>
> Abstract
> A system and method are 
  provided for specifying a legality expression for
use in a system for 
  processing the
> legality expression. The system and method include 
  providing a legality
expression language, including at least
> one of 
  a duty element specifying an obligation that a principal must
perform an 
  act, a ban element specifying a
> prohibition that a principal must not 
  perform an act, an intent element
specifying an intention that a
> 
  principal wants to perform an act, and a claim element specifying 
  an
assertion that a principal does perform an
> act. The system and 
  method further include interpreting by the system a
legality expression 
  specified using the
> legality expression 
  language.
>
>
>
> > -------- Original Message 
  --------
> > Subject: [legalxml-econtracts] Agenda for upcoming 
  meeting from the
> > OASIS Legal XML Member Section Electronic 
  Contracts Technical Committee
> > Secretary (File id: @@2398)
> 
  > From: "Dr. Laurence Leff" <>
> > Date: Mon, 
  June 21, 2004 8:38 pm
> > To: 
  
> >
> > Agenda for 
  Conference Call
> >             
  Electronic Contracts Technical Committee of the
> >     
                 OASIS Legal XML Member 
  Section
> >
> >             
                   June 22nd 
  2004
> >                 
                18:00 Eastern
> > 
                  Dial 512 225 3050 
   - Use 84759# for Pin Code (*)
> >
> >
> > 
  18:00:00 Tue Jun 22 2004 in America/New_York converts to
> > 22:00:00 
  Tue Jun 22 2004 in GMT
> >
> > Welcome and Roll Call
> 
  >
> > 1.  Review our requirements document with the goal of 
  reaching closure
> >     and/or determining what changes 
  must be made so that we could vote
> > on it.
> >
> 
  > New Business
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing 
  list (and be removed from the roster
> > of the OASIS TC), go 
  to
> 
  >
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/legalxml-econtracts/members/lea
ve_workgroup.php.
>
> 
  To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster 
  of
the OASIS TC), go 
  to
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/legalxml-econtracts/members/lea
ve_workgroup.php.
>

To 
  unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the 
  OASIS TC), go to 
  http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/legalxml-econtracts/members/leave_workgroup.php.

_________________________________________________________________
The 
  information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it 
  is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any 
  review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action 
  in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the 
  intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please 
  contact the sender and delete the material from any 
computer.