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

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

RE: IPP> FW: Copyright statements in drafts

From: carl@manros.com
Date: Tue Jul 13 2004 - 00:18:49 EDT

  • Next message: jwenn@cp10.es.xerox.com: "IPP> Re: Document"

    Ira,

    I think you are interpreting a lot more into the text than what is actually
    there.

    In my view, the only situation in which somebody can actually fault you
    according to this text is IF YOUR NAME IS ON AN APPLICABLE PATENT
    APPLICATION in your company.

    I think we have wasted enough bandwidth on this subject by now. I am
    gradually getting the feeling that you are flogging this dead horse because
    you don't want to see the editing of the management draft finished by the
    end of our deadline by the end of this week.

    What would interest me a lot more is how we are progressing with the editing
    of of that last document.

    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: owner-ipp@pwg.org [mailto:owner-ipp@pwg.org]On Behalf Of McDonald,
    Ira
      Sent: Monday, July 12, 2004 1:54 PM
      To: 'Harry Lewis'; don@lexmark.com; 'Hastings, Tom N'
      Cc: 'carl@manros.com'; McDonald, Ira; 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 : Tue Jul 13 2004 - 00:20:09 EDT