OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

ebxml-mktg-sc message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Subject: RE: [ebxml-mktg-sc] [Fwd: [CEFACT-LWG:261] ebXML legal issues]


I'm a graduate of the NCC, a former member of DSDM,
and a member of BCS, and I'm shocked and dismayed at
the level of disinformation and knowledge in the field that 
this article exhibits, a fact that the author freely acknowledges!

I am writing to ask that the offending document be removed
from any online resources by the NCC, and that David Marsh 
issue a retraction.

It's been a while since we saw an article this confused and
ill-informed.   That it should eminate from the UK is doubly
distressing, since the overall standards that UK publications
uphold are of the highest.

What kind of peer review did this article have, if any?

The author makes the most basic errors, and completely
fails to mention the specific IP, and discuss the actual
legal statements made by the parties concerned and
the formal submissions to ebXML that have fully resolved
these issues already.  But instead infers that there are some
mysterious "road-block" patents that could apply.  His grasp
of patent issues in the United States is rudimentary.  As a 
holder of two US Patents for software technology I feel able 
to comment on how business uses and interacts with 
patent holders, and it is not how he infers at all.    There has 
been much written on this topic and he fails to reference
even one authoritative source in this area.

His statement that "ebXML is too immature for there to be neat
solutions" is just completely against the real facts.

The ebXML standards have gone through one of the most
rigorous processes known, and further more these have
been implemented by dozens of major corporations such 
as Fujitsu, Sun, and Sybase, and validated in major
industry production environments.  As our documentation
at http://www.ebxml.org   attests.

Not to mention the fact that his example about EDIFACT
messages shows how ignorant he is - since the whole
premise of his rambling falters on the fact that EDIFACT
messages can be transmitted and received by ebXML

I hope we can speedly resolve this matter and move on.
Those people that have received a link to this item should
be re-informed via a new email announcement that it has 
been removed due to the low quality of the information it 
contains, and notified that in future more strenous efforts 
will be made to validate content prior to publication.

Monica, thanks for bringing this matter to our attention.

David RR Webber, B.Sc,  University of Kent at Canterbury,

Co-Author "ebXML - The New Global Standard for Business 
via the Internet", by New Riders Publishing, and Chair of the


Message text written by "Monica J. Martin"
I think there should be some type of official response to this article.  
I have concerns about it singling out ebXML, and do not understand how 
patents issues are limited to ebXML.


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Search: Match: Sort by:
Words: | Help

Powered by eList eXpress LLC