On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 5:21 PM, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>
>> i've committed a stripped down template and moved the prose into a
>> guide. this guide is just copy ATM
>
> With all due and sincere respect to Roy, the current IP Clearance form was
> d
Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > The Legal Committee does not appear to have any concerns over Roy's
proposed
> > changes.
>
> i don't recall being officially asked
>
I was referring to
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
in [EMAIL PROTECTED] In any event, you've propo
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 1:47 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 1:44 PM, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>>> > Given that we now have a Legal Committee, any substantive revision of
>> that
>>> > form should be
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 1:44 PM, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>
>> If the IP template should be RTC then it should be moved into the
>> policy area. But IMO the incubator is not the right place for
>> normative legal policy: the legal committee should ma
Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> If the IP template should be RTC then it should be moved into the
> policy area. But IMO the incubator is not the right place for
> normative legal policy: the legal committee should maintain policy.
It probably embodies both procedure and policy. And I agree with
On 4/23/08, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>
> > i've committed a stripped down template and moved the prose into a
> > guide. this guide is just copy ATM
>
> With all due and sincere respect to Roy, the current IP Clearance form was
> done in conjunction
