IPP Mail Archive: RE: IPP> FW: Copyright statements in drafts

RE: IPP> FW: Copyright statements in drafts

From: don@lexmark.com
Date: Sun Jul 11 2004 - 14:16:21 EDT

  • Next message: McDonald, Ira: "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 : Sun Jul 11 2004 - 14:17:23 EDT