[Asrg] RE: ASRG IPR policy (was RE: US Spam patents: Partial list)

"Peter Kay" <peter@titankey.com> Fri, 13 June 2003 17:20 UTC

Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA14054 for <asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Jun 2003 13:20:39 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h5DHKBh17479 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 13 Jun 2003 13:20:11 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (lists.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5DHKAm17472 for <asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Jun 2003 13:20:10 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA13964; Fri, 13 Jun 2003 13:20:07 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19QsBc-0007Aj-00; Fri, 13 Jun 2003 13:18:00 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19QsBb-0007Ag-00; Fri, 13 Jun 2003 13:17:59 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5DGc2a28457; Fri, 13 Jun 2003 12:38:02 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5DGbLm28089 for <asrg@optimus.ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Jun 2003 12:37:21 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA11417 for <Asrg@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Jun 2003 12:37:18 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19QrWB-0006YS-00 for Asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Jun 2003 12:35:11 -0400
Received: from imail.centuryc.net ([216.30.168.20] helo=isp-appsvr01.centuryc.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19QrWA-0006Y8-00 for Asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 13 Jun 2003 12:35:10 -0400
Received: from cybercominc.com [66.91.134.126] by isp-appsvr01.centuryc.com (SMTPD32-8.00) id ADF627100F0; Fri, 13 Jun 2003 06:38:14 -1000
Received: from a66b91n134client123.hawaii.rr.com (66.91.134.123) by cybercominc-zzt with SMTP; Fri, 13 Jun 2003 16:41:42 GMT
X-Titankey-e_id: <54ae314c-1c86-4a34-a21c-8e5aba40cce7>
Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0
Message-ID: <DD198B5D07F04347B7266A3F35C42B0B0D8CD2@io.cybercom.local>
Thread-Topic: ASRG IPR policy (was RE: US Spam patents: Partial list)
Thread-Index: AcMxYBG5QH1RgdQ0TPiFs/d8Za/AGAAakYcg
From: Peter Kay <peter@titankey.com>
To: Paul Judge <paul.judge@ciphertrust.com>, Yakov Shafranovich <research@solidmatrix.com>, Asrg@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by www1.ietf.org id h5DGbMm28090
Subject: [Asrg] RE: ASRG IPR policy (was RE: US Spam patents: Partial list)
Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/asrg/>
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 06:36:54 -1000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

This is good. Are you going to post it somewhere permanent?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Judge [mailto:paul.judge@ciphertrust.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 5:46 PM
> To: 'Yakov Shafranovich'; Peter Kay; 'Asrg@ietf.org'
> Subject: ASRG IPR policy (was RE: US Spam patents: Partial list)
> 
> 
> 
> We have decided to adopt the following IPR policy for the 
> ASRG. It is based on the IETF's IPR policy as outlined in RFC 2026.
> 
> 
> "By submission of a contribution, each person actually submitting the
>    contribution is deemed to agree to the following terms and 
> conditions
>    on his own behalf, on behalf of the organization (if any) he
>    represents and on behalf of the owners of any propriety 
> rights in the
>    contribution..  Where a submission identifies contributors in
>    addition to the contributor(s) who provide the actual 
> submission, the
>    actual submitter(s) represent that each other named contributor was
>    made aware of and agreed to accept the same terms and conditions on
>    his own behalf, on behalf of any organization he may represent and
>    any known owner of any proprietary rights in the contribution.
> 
> The contributor represents that he has disclosed the existence of
>       any proprietary or intellectual property rights in the
>       contribution that are reasonably and personally known to the
>       contributor.  The contributor does not represent that he
>       personally knows of all potentially pertinent proprietary and
>       intellectual property rights owned or claimed by the 
> organization
>       he represents (if any) or third parties."
> 
> This means that the person submitting a proposal is 
> responsible for stating any relevant IPR that he knows about 
> even if he is not the holder of the rights. This does allow 
> for other members to notify a contributor about relevant IPR 
> after the initial submission. The contributor should then 
> disclose this information in revisions of the contribution.
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Yakov Shafranovich [mailto:research@solidmatrix.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 2:42 PM
> > To: Peter Kay; Asrg@ietf.org
> > Subject: RE: [Asrg] US Spam patents: Partial list
> > 
> > 
> > At 06:32 AM 6/12/2003 -1000, Peter Kay wrote:
> > 
> > >IMHO: as an a holder of a anti-spam patent pending, I think
> > its best to
> > >let IPR holders approach us. Otherwise you put yourself in the
> > >unenviable position of "authority" on patents. If you just 
> > say "these
> > >are the IPR claims that have been submitted to us" that
> > makes it clean
> > >and simple, not to mention easy to maintain.
> > 
> > In some cases this would not be true. Take MailBlocks, for
> > example - they 
> > are claiming patents on all C/R systems. They have not 
> > approached, and 
> > since their IP is of very general nature, thus we must 
> > approach them to 
> > solicit a submission of IPR claims which is what I have done. 
> > Otherwise, we 
> > might be working on a standard only to find out that it is 
> > patented. As for 
> > the patents that are covering every nook and cranny of 
> > anti-spam, I am 
> > agreeing with you. It would be an impossible task to catalog 
> > all patents in 
> > the world.
> > 
> > Therefore, I am suggesting that we should have the following
> > policy: 1. Solicit input from IP holders on very broad 
> > business methods patents 
> > such as the MailBlocks patents.
> > 2. Request that all members of the group that have IP, submit 
> > information 
> > about it.
> > 3. Accept submissions from IPR claimants that are not part of 
> > the group as 
> > they send them.
> > 
> > P.S. BTW, Peter, it would probably be prudent that you let us
> > know some 
> > details on your IP. Feel free to use the template 
> > (http://www.solidmatrix.com/research/asrg/asrg-ipr.html).
> > 
> > Yakov
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Asrg mailing list
> > Asrg@ietf.org
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
> > 
> 
> 
> 


_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg