The minutes of TAB meetings are provided for informational purposes only. Discussions and decisions described in the minutes should not be interpreted as official or definitive TAB or The Linux Foundation policy. While efforts are made to ensure their accuracy and completeness, we regret we cannot guarantee that they are. If you have corrections or additions, please contact tech-board at lists.linux-foundation.org
Michael Kerrist will start in one week.
There wasn't a huge amount of novel stuff with the legal summit. There was a lot of convincing corporate summit for the people who aren't in the LF inner circle why binary modules are a bad idea. They were taking EMC's tack which is why isn't a problem.
We should have a statement saying that binary modules are evil; not a legal statement, but a social statement. Greg K-H will draft distro and kernel maintainer on modules.
We only need read-only access. Both James and Greg isn't interested in a two-tiered access where only some kernel developers have individual access. Ted will talk to Dan about shifting strategies. Two-tiered access is a non-starter; we would much rather settle for read-only access.
Greg has similar issues with the USB SIG.
We should try to shoot for read-only access to published specs, followed by read-only to evolving specs, and the ability to inject suggestions into the spec should be our lowest priority. (And given the Rambus court decision, the last may be largely impossible.)
After a heated discussion on LKML, how to make this into productive discussion. There is a lot of good stuff that is happening, but it isn't being acknowledged.
TAB will have call with Andrew next week.
IBM is trying to set up a trial run of maybe 2 weeks with USPTO, using new search terms, focused in just a few of the classifications/areas, preferably ones in which we have open source experience/background. One backup area of interest is databases (open source), but we/they need to find the right people to help with that (like MySQL or Postgres help).