[Cryptech Core] draft template document

[Leif Johansson]

On 2014-06-15 14:31, Fredrik Thulin wrote:
> On Friday, June 13, 2014 03:37:55 PM Leif Johansson wrote:
>> At 11 pages in total and NB that there are still a few laywers in
>> Denmark who haven't gotten a shot at this so we might get a few
>> addl comments.
>>
>> Note that section 9 is a bit more wordy because the choice to go with
>> arbitration carries some standard language around confidentiality.
>>
>> In general I believe this is a reasonable compromise. There may be
>> certain aspects that could be improved but we also want to be done.
> 
> I have a problem with 5.2:
> 
>> 5.2. The Supplier warrants that the result of the Supplier’s performance of
>> the Services will be an original work product which will not infringe upon
>> any third party’s intellectual property rights.
> 
> I don't see how a contractor can warrant that there exist no IPR covering 
> something, as opposed to no IPR the contractor is aware of. Maybe it's a 
> lingual thing, but I'm definitely not comfortable with that wording.
> 

I'll ask the laywer.

> I'm not happy about the one-sided and unlimited (both in time and cost) 5.4 
> either, and the explicit exception of 5.4 in 7.2. Really, if the project asks 
> a contractor to deliver X where X turns out to be covered by IPR or patent, 
> the blame for that can't be put solely in the contractors lap IMO.

I guess I might understand the "no knowledge of conflicting IPR" vs "no
conflicting IPR" argument (and I'll ask the laywer) but NDN will never
ever take on *any* responsibility for checking for IPR and I've never
ever seen a contributors agreement that didn't place the responsability
for IPR on the supplier.

I know for a fact that if we start to go down that road we kill the project.

	Cheers Leif