At a recent non-PWG meeting, I listened to a discussion of IP. One part
of the discussion is perhaps relevant to recent discussions on this email
group.
Here is my recollection of it. A person cited an example of a Dell employee
attending a meeting where the employee checked a box on the attendance
sheet stating that he/she was not aware of any patents relevant to the
subject of the meeting. Dell later found that it had a relevant patent,
but was unable to enforce it because of the innocuous statement by the Dell
employee.
So, I wonder if the IETF statement could trigger such a problem for the
company whose employee makes the required IP claim.
Bob Herriot
At Monday 7/12/2004 08:03 PM, Harry Lewis wrote:
>Doubt I'll have a problem (because I'm not aware of any related IP in this
>case)... but, of course, need to check with lawyers. What is the context
>and timeframe of the part that says I will disclose any related IP I
>BECOME aware of. What.. in 20 years if I become aware I have to disclose?
>Doesn't seem well enough defined. I would have to assume the statement is
>limited to the timeframe in which the RFC is being authored, edited,
>reviewed etc... not AFTER it has been issued.
>----------------------------------------------
>Harry Lewis
>IBM STSM
>Chairman - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
>http://www.pwg.org
>IBM Printing Systems
>http://www.ibm.com/printers
>303-924-5337
>----------------------------------------------
>
>
>"McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com>
>
>07/12/2004 02:54 PM
>To
>Harry Lewis/Boulder/IBM@IBMUS, don@lexmark.com, "'Hastings, Tom N'"
><hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com>
>cc
>"'carl@manros.com'" <carl@manros.com>, "McDonald, Ira"
><imcdonald@sharplabs.com>, "Ipp@Pwg. Org" <ipp@pwg.org>
>Subject
>RE: IPP> FW: Copyright statements in drafts
>
>
>
>
>Hi Harry and Tom,
>
>To take this out of the speculative realm, let's get specific.
>
>In order to get out the final I-D version of IPP Admin Ops,
>Tom Hastings (Xerox) and Harry Lewis and Carl Kugler
>(both of IBM) are going to have to put their names and
>their companies names to that exact statement (which
>only has the "reasonably" qualification in the referenced
>RFC 3668,but NOT in the actual statement).
>
>Do you Harry plan to sign as co-editor of the new I-D
>whose first sentence MUST be exactly
>
> By submitting this Internet-Draft, I certify that any applicable
> patent or other IPR claims of which I am aware have been disclosed,
> or will be disclosed, and any of which I become aware will be
> disclosed, in accordance with RFC 3668.
>
>I will be pleasantly surprised if at least Xerox's lawyers
>don't balk at this text.
>
>Cheers,
>- Ira
>
>
>Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
>Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
>PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839
>phone: +1-906-494-2434
>email: imcdonald@sharplabs.com
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Harry Lewis [mailto:harryl@us.ibm.com]
>Sent: Monday, July 12, 2004 12:59 PM
>To: don@lexmark.com
>Cc: 'carl@manros.com'; McDonald, Ira; Ipp@Pwg. Org
>Subject: RE: IPP> FW: Copyright statements in drafts
>
>
>If (as w/g participant) I "have been made aware... of... essential
>claims..." then someone in the know must have made me aware. Would seem
>more appropriate (and effective) for THEM to disclose, not me.
>----------------------------------------------
>Harry Lewis
>IBM STSM
>Chairman - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
>http://www.pwg.org
>IBM Printing Systems
>http://www.ibm.com/printers
>303-924-5337
>----------------------------------------------
>
>don@lexmark.com
>Sent by: owner-ipp@pwg.org
>
>07/12/2004 09:59 AM
>To
>"McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com>
>cc
>"'carl@manros.com'" <carl@manros.com>, "McDonald, Ira"
><imcdonald@sharplabs.com>, "Ipp@Pwg. Org" <ipp@pwg.org>, owner-ipp@pwg.org
>Subject
>RE: IPP> FW: Copyright statements in drafts
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Ira:
>
>The IEEE's policy is one of assurance rather than disclosure. Disclosure
>is informally encouraged.
>
>The W3C; however, does have a policy mandating disclosure. It does
>carefully walk this line by stating in clause 6.7:
>
>"Disclosure of third party patents is only required where the Advisory
>Committee Representative or Working Group participant has been made aware
>that the third party patent holder or applicant has asserted that its
>patent contains Essential Claims, unless such disclosure would breach a
>pre-existing nondisclosure obligation."
>
>It is important to realize that in RFC3668, from which clause 6.1.3 it
>says:
>
>"If a person has information about IPR that may Cover IETF Contributions,
>but the participant is not required to disclose because they do not meet
>the criteria in Section 6.6 (e.g., the IPR is owned by some other company),
>such person is encouraged to notify the IETF by sending an email message to
>ietf-ipr@ietf.org. Such a notice should be sent as soon as reasonably
>possible after the person realizes the connection."
>
>Notice the use of the word "may" in the first sentence. If you have even
>the faintest idea that a patent might be on material in an I-D you should
>disclose the existence of the patent but I don't read that section to mean
>that you are claiming its applicability. Also notice that disclosure of
>the IPR of others is encouraged and not required.
>
>The statement mandated to be included is actually extracted from RFC3667,
>clause 5.1. Since it states "in accordance with RFC3668" and since RFC3668
>only encourages the disclosure of IPR belonging to others I'm not sure what
>the hang up is. There seems to be enough weasel words here that unless you
>intentionally obfuscating the patents on your submission you'd be OK
>especially if they are owned by someone else and for whom you are not an
>agent or employee.
>
>BTW: I am not a lawyer.
>
>**********************************************
>Don Wright don@lexmark.com
>
>Chair, IEEE SA Standards Board
>Member, IEEE-ISTO Board of Directors
>f.wright@ieee.org / f.wright@computer.org
>
>Director, Alliances & Standards
>Lexmark International
>740 New Circle Rd
>Lexington, Ky 40550
>859-825-4808 (phone) 603-963-8352 (fax)
>**********************************************
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>|---------+---------------------------->
>| | "McDonald, Ira" |
>| | <imcdonald@sharpl|
>| | abs.com> |
>| | |
>| | 07/12/2004 11:09 |
>| | AM |
>| | |
>|---------+---------------------------->
> >-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------------------|
>|
>|
>| To: "'don@lexmark.com'" <don@lexmark.com>, "McDonald, Ira"
><imcdonald@sharplabs.com> |
>| cc: "'carl@manros.com'" <carl@manros.com>, "McDonald, Ira"
><imcdonald@sharplabs.com>, "Ipp@Pwg. Org" |
>| <ipp@pwg.org>,
>owner-ipp@pwg.org
>|
>| Subject: RE: IPP> FW: Copyright statements in
>drafts |
> >-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------------------|
>
>
>
>
>Hi Don,
>
>Disclosing someone else's patent worries me.
>
>Disclosing that _in the judgment of that someone else_ this
>patent has applicability to this spec is legally very dangerous.
>Patent holders are typically very touchy about the timing of
>making such judgments public.
>
>Making document authors certify that they are not aware
>of any relevant patent (belonging to other parties) is
>_not_ consistent with the IPR policies of W3C or IEEE
>(as far as I know).
>
>Cheers,
>- Ira
>
>Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
>Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
>PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839
>phone: +1-906-494-2434
>email: imcdonald@sharplabs.com
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: don@lexmark.com [mailto:don@lexmark.com]
>Sent: Monday, July 12, 2004 8:09 AM
>To: McDonald, Ira
>Cc: 'carl@manros.com'; McDonald, Ira; Ipp@Pwg. Org; owner-ipp@pwg.org
>Subject: RE: IPP> FW: Copyright statements in drafts
>
>
>
>Ira:
>
>Yes you would be required to disclose the patent held by someone else that
>you were told about; however, it is not your responsibility to assess
>whether the patent is applicable. Today, virtually all standards
>organization's patent policies (IEEE, W3C, ISO, etc.) either encourage or
>mandate the submitter to disclose any patents which might be applicable to
>the submission whether held by you, your employer or someone else IF you
>actually know about it.
>
>I don't understand the problem. Why should you worry about disclosing
>someone else's patent... it's public information anyway.
>
>**********************************************
>Don Wright don@lexmark.com
>
>Chair, IEEE SA Standards Board
>Member, IEEE-ISTO Board of Directors
>f.wright@ieee.org / f.wright@computer.org
>
>Director, Alliances & Standards
>Lexmark International
>740 New Circle Rd
>Lexington, Ky 40550
>859-825-4808 (phone) 603-963-8352 (fax)
>**********************************************
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>|---------+---------------------------->
>| | "McDonald, Ira" |
>| | <imcdonald@sharpl|
>| | abs.com> |
>| | |
>| | 07/11/2004 03:10 |
>| | PM |
>| | |
>|---------+---------------------------->
>
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>--------------------------------------------|
>|
>|
>| To: "'don@lexmark.com'" <don@lexmark.com>, "McDonald, Ira"
><imcdonald@sharplabs.com> |
>| cc: "'carl@manros.com'" <carl@manros.com>, "Ipp@Pwg. Org"
><ipp@pwg.org>, owner-ipp@pwg.org |
>| Subject: RE: IPP> FW: Copyright statements in drafts
>|
>
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>--------------------------------------------|
>
>
>
>
>Hi Don,
>
>My very point: "or someone has told you about it". The reference
>to RFC 3668 has no protection benefits at all. In law, the
>direct text is everything.
>
>If a collaborator on a public standard (from another vendor)
>tells me out of courtesy about a probably applicable patent
>(only lawyers really know about applicability), then this
>I-D boilerplate requires _me_ to disclose _their_ patent.
>
>Not even close to acceptable.
>
>Cheers,
>- Ira
>
>Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
>Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
>PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839
>phone: +1-906-494-2434
>email: imcdonald@sharplabs.com
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: don@lexmark.com [mailto:don@lexmark.com]
>Sent: Sunday, July 11, 2004 2:16 PM
>To: McDonald, Ira
>Cc: 'carl@manros.com'; Ipp@Pwg. Org; owner-ipp@pwg.org
>Subject: RE: IPP> FW: Copyright statements in drafts
>
>
>It seems to me saying "of which I am aware" and then "in accordance with
>RFC 3668" in the I-D would explicitly qualify awareness to be "reasonably
>and personally known to the submitter."
>
>If you don't know about it then it can't be held against you. How could
>you reasonably and personally be aware of a patent held by someone else
>unless you spend your days trolling the various countries patent databases
>or someone has told you about it?
>
>*******************************************
>Don Wright don@lexmark.com
>
>Chair, IEEE SA Standards Board
>Member, IEEE-ISTO Board of Directors
>f.wright@ieee.org / f.wright@computer.org
>
>Director, Alliances and Standards
>Lexmark International
>740 New Circle Rd C14/082-3
>Lexington, Ky 40550
>859-825-4808 (phone) 603-963-8352 (fax)
>*******************************************
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>"McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com>
>Sent by: owner-ipp@pwg.org
>07/10/2004 12:57 PM
>
>
> To: "'carl@manros.com'" <carl@manros.com>, "Ipp@Pwg. Org"
><ipp@pwg.org>
> cc:
> Subject: RE: IPP> FW: Copyright statements in drafts
>
>
>Hi,
>
>Harald Alvestrand replied to Carl-Uno Manros (see below):
>
>We do - which is why the phrase "reasonably and personally known to
>the submitter" in RFC 3667 / 3668 is so important.
>
>
>But "reasonably and personally" is NOT part of the IPR statement
>required at the beginning of every submitted I-D (without which
>the I-D Editor will no longer publish any I-D).
>
>Here's the relevant verbatim quote from "1id-guidelines.txt":
>
>All Internet-Drafts must begin with the following intellectual
>property rights (IPR) statement:
>
>"By submitting this Internet-Draft, I certify that any applicable
>patent or other IPR claims of which I am aware have been disclosed, or
>will be disclosed, and any of which I become aware will be disclosed,
>in accordance with RFC 3668."
>
>
>Personally, I'm not writing any more I-Ds. Because there's not any
>limitation in this IPR boilerplate about patents or IPR of _other_
>parties that the editor may be or become aware of.
>
>Cheers,
>- Ira
>
>Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
>Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
>PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839
>phone: +1-906-494-2434
>email: imcdonald@sharplabs.com
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-ipp@pwg.org [mailto:owner-ipp@pwg.org]On Behalf Of
>carl@manros.com
>Sent: Saturday, July 10, 2004 3:22 AM
>To: Ipp@Pwg. Org
>Subject: IPP> FW: Copyright statements in drafts
>
>
>All,
>
>Regarding some of the new required text in Internet Drafts.
>
>This has been discussed for a while on the IETF Chairs list.
>
>I raised a similar qustion to the one brougth up by Ira.
>
>See my question and the official answer from the IETF Chair Harald
>Alvestrand below.
>
>Carl-Uno
>
>Carl-Uno Manros
>700 Carnegie Street #3724
>Henderson, NV 89052, USA
>Tel +1-702-617-9414
>Fax +1-702-617-9417
>Mob +1-702-525-0727
>Email carl@manros.com
>Web www.manros.com
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand [mailto:harald@alvestrand.no]
>Sent: Sunday, June 06, 2004 10:02 AM
>To: carl@manros.com; wgchairs@ietf.org
>Subject: RE: Copyright statements in drafts
>
>
>--On 3. juni 2004 15:49 -0700 carl@manros.com wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am not sure whether I missed this in the discussion, but I can see
>some
> > problems with Copyright statements in early drafts. There may well be
> > people or organizations which already hold patents or copyrights for
> > things that find their way into I-Ds. If they are not actively involved
> > in that particular WG, they may not discover any infringements until the
> > RFC is in IETF wide Last Call. Hopefully we provide for Copyright
> > objections at that stage, even if there has been umpteen earlier I-Ds on
> > the subject.
>
>We do - which is why the phrase "reasonably and personally known to the
>submitter" in RFC 3667 / 3668 is so important.
>
> Harald
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jul 21 2004 - 05:19:18 EDT