[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
- [Asrg] ASRG IPR policy (was RE: US Spam patents: … Paul Judge
- RE: [Asrg] ASRG IPR policy (was RE: US Spam paten… Yakov Shafranovich
- RE: [Asrg] ASRG IPR policy (was RE: US Spam paten… Bob Wyman
- [Asrg] RE: ASRG IPR policy (was RE: US Spam paten… Peter Kay
- Re: [Asrg] ASRG IPR policy (was RE: US Spam paten… Kee Hinckley
- Re: [Asrg] RE: ASRG IPR policy (was RE: US Spam p… Yakov Shafranovich