seeking comment on draft outputs and IP policy

03 Dec 2013

Dear RDA WG and IG chairs,
I am chairing an RDA Task Force developing a policy recommendation to Council on what constitute formal RDA outputs and what their associated IP should be.
We are taking a two phase approach. In phase one, we define what outputs RDA might produce and endorse. In phase two, we invite international legal experts to guide us on the appropriate IP for those outputs. The central goal is to encourage adoption of RDA principles and outputs.
We have just completed phase 1 and have an initial draft policy. The intent was for RDA to promote openness and interoperability but to own little and not to formally certify applications. Based on a review of known and potential WG outputs, we define classes of outputs: general "discussion documents,” formal “Recommendations on Data,” and external implementations that make use of RDA recommendations and discussions. The general idea is that RDA endorses and maintains relatively few simple documents and that these are available “openly". We encourage transparency and require WG members to state their interests, but we generally avoid conflicts by formally owning very little.
Details and the draft policy are at
We are just now beginning to involve legal experts, but we would very much welcome your comments on the policy to date. Our goal is to have a final recommendation in January.
Please comment directly on the wiki directly (you need to be logged in):
Thanks, as always, for your contributions to RDA!
Mark Parsons, Secretariat and TF Chair
Beth Plale, TAB co-Chair
Raphael Ritz, DFT co-Chair
Larry Lannom, DTR co-chair and interim OAB
Juan Biccaregui, interim OAB co-chair
Tony Hey, Council
Gerry Lane, IBM