Return-Path: X-Original-To: atp@mail2.ietf.org Delivered-To: atp@mail2.ietf.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DFFA1188577A for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2026 10:43:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1784310234; bh=Y2q5mTrTaBkzHtDvmTWpO99zyG3K6138wv6ffwl5HcI=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=UqUDBxkl4dh4GNetAQJjVkA7U6q0UHU+CrpK0IpDrsTJfPyVd4oTQcQ8nX3vaGVXv W0PCe62CvS+b5NYvTeMgarqVEUiZhzgZIXE/3UAOLO4Hu+fbCcF3foCtDNboFlgKSp bbtAzvuXk5U1fxkilWThE4m793D845X7rmJAQ4mI= X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: mail2.ietf.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=brandedcode.com Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RCQLiDsPP3nd for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2026 10:43:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp-bc0f.mail.infomaniak.ch (smtp-bc0f.mail.infomaniak.ch [IPv6:2001:1600:19:fff0::bc0f]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B58F111885768 for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2026 10:43:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp-3-0000.mail.infomaniak.ch (smtp-3-0000.mail.infomaniak.ch [10.4.36.107]) by smtp-4-3000.mail.infomaniak.ch (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4h1y2B38Lcz3bf; Fri, 17 Jul 2026 19:43:46 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=brandedcode.com; s=20250226; t=1784310226; bh=QscIPHTG0HwZSl/T5nACxwOr1IVlGXBqPWjzaHiaqt4=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To:From; b=PTUYU9LufZRcgyJETo5Qpvgy84Pj7FA8YMoe3bnVVAhgL+TxlsAFJGegIwujmtva2 bwL8WhNMa56CdS+ng3Ln9VV1El/xZ/7sfJWNm5ctU3BadC6FxdDqcreIzCpoCg+Xfl SMJaY2uqPnBHTV5cW4erWpaiDSEkmlf4c010TFf4Imh47UHkUydXTq14Z+9xPKDmp+ lmLYT2aTFrr9Z7IAgJhEMtd7iKkjLztVcEBDlRqYAANgHeLKWRk0PEPpdAQMLpEspE 8mw04Yab6o9pW2YBWUuLtACPHREj7kgAXyiLemVP4tF6+Yq6j82myhtKe+4we47kye iqufmBvM0hoEA== Received: from unknown by smtp-3-0000.mail.infomaniak.ch (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 4h1y290jr9zj9C; Fri, 17 Jul 2026 19:43:44 +0200 (CEST) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_105FA874-7BFE-4CC3-A1BD-B8FE942824E9" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3864.600.51.1.1\)) From: "Emelia S." In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2026 19:43:34 +0200 Message-Id: <7A4DABFF-A8D7-4FC5-8C82-EB4AEDEE2B5F@brandedcode.com> References: <6e0bd773-7fbf-48c7-96de-75be6fbd0972@mfzx.net> <9AA10E4D-E46A-40BE-ADAF-D9740079277B@seltzer.org> To: Bryan Newbold X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3864.600.51.1.1) X-Infomaniak-Routing: alpha Message-ID-Hash: PES3ZE6FT4AEC6XIVHMSKXQMDUH4ZAMP X-Message-ID-Hash: PES3ZE6FT4AEC6XIVHMSKXQMDUH4ZAMP X-MailFrom: emelia@brandedcode.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header CC: Daniel Holmgren , Wendy Seltzer , atp@ietf.org, Eric Rescorla , "Maxine S. Fritz" X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6 Precedence: list Subject: =?utf-8?q?=5BAtp=5D_Re=3A_AT_Protocol_Trademark?= List-Id: Authenticated Transfer Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: --Apple-Mail=_105FA874-7BFE-4CC3-A1BD-B8FE942824E9 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 If all other options fail, maybe it'd be worth setting up a lightweight = AT Protocol Foundation (maybe under linux foundation or similar = stewarding org) that holds the trademark + atproto.com = domain? It would of course be more work, but could then be governed by some = process, similar to PLC's new entity (with the difference that this = could just be a US 501(c)-something). =E2=80=94 Emelia > On 17 Jul 2026, at 18:09, Bryan Newbold = wrote: >=20 > I would also be in favor of IPMC ownership of the trademark if it is = an option. Happy to talk to folks about this in Vienna next week (I = arrive Tuesday late). >=20 > --bryan >=20 > On Fri, Jul 17, 2026 at 7:28=E2=80=AFAM Daniel Holmgren = > wrote: >> Ah thanks for chiming in Wendy! >>=20 >> I expect it's a bit early to get into details. But it's reassuring to = hear that this might be in the class of things that the IPMC can help = with. Is there any prior art for protocol trademarks that are held by = the IPMC? >>=20 >> On Fri, Jul 17, 2026 at 4:06=E2=80=AFPM Wendy Seltzer = > wrote: >>> As an IPMC director, I'm happy to take questions about the IETF = Trust (now IETF Intellectual Property Management Corporation = ).=20 >>>=20 >>> I imagine the board would want to discuss at what stage of standards = development it could be appropriate to accept trademarks, since our core = purpose is to support the Internet standards process. (More than = copyrights, trademarks incur some maintenance obligations, so it's not = as simple to say we'll take anything.) >>>=20 >>> --Wendy >>>=20 >>> On July 17, 2026 6:17:58 AM PDT, Daniel Holmgren = > wrote: >>> >That would be ideal in my opinion. Though my understanding is that = that >>> >isn't the intended purpose of the IETF Trust. It's more for = IETF-specific >>> >marks (like "IETF" for instance) than marks for the protocols = themselves. >>> >I'll poke around and try to get a clearer answer. >>> > >>> >On Fri, Jul 17, 2026 at 3:13=E2=80=AFPM Eric Rescorla > wrote: >>> > >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> On Fri, Jul 17, 2026 at 6:09=E2=80=AFAM Maxine S. Fritz = >> >> 40mfzx.net@dmarc.ietf.org > = wrote: >>> >> >>> >>> Daniel Holmgren > wrote on 2026-07-17 08:02:02 >>> >>> -0500: >>> >>> > Bluesky is also interested in having another entity (other = than >>> >>> Bluesky) hold and enforce the >>> >>> > trademark. Though, for practicality's sake, since Bluesky PBC = purchased >>> >>> the mark and wants to >>> >>> > provide protection as soon as possible, Bluesky currently = holds and >>> >>> enforces it. >>> >>> >>> >>> Has the IETF Trust () been considered = as a >>> >>> potential long-term holder >>> >>> of the ATPROTOCOL trademark? This seems like the natural choice = for an >>> >>> independent entity >>> >>> responsible for the trademark corresponding to an IETF standard. >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> I think this would be a good idea. Absent this, I think that we = should >>> >> consider renaming the >>> >> IETF version of the protocol. >>> >> >>> >> -Ekr >>> >> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >>> >> Atp mailing list -- atp@ietf.org >>> >> To unsubscribe send an email to atp-leave@ietf.org = >>> >> >>>=20 >>> --=20 >>> Wendy Seltzer >> _______________________________________________ >> Atp mailing list -- atp@ietf.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to atp-leave@ietf.org = > _______________________________________________ > Atp mailing list -- atp@ietf.org > To unsubscribe send an email to atp-leave@ietf.org --Apple-Mail=_105FA874-7BFE-4CC3-A1BD-B8FE942824E9 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 If all other options fail, maybe it'd be = worth setting up a lightweight AT Protocol Foundation (maybe under linux = foundation or similar stewarding org) that holds the trademark + atproto.com domain?

It would of course be more work, but could then be governed by some = process, similar to PLC's new entity (with the difference that this = could just be a US 501(c)-something).

=E2=80=94 = Emelia

On 17 Jul 2026, at 18:09, Bryan Newbold = <bryan=3D40blueskyweb.xyz@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:

I would = also be in favor of IPMC ownership of the trademark if it is an option. = Happy to talk to folks about this in Vienna next week (I arrive Tuesday = late).

--bryan

On Fri, Jul 17, 2026 at 7:28=E2=80=AFAM Daniel = Holmgren <daniel=3D40blueskyweb.xyz@dmarc.iet= f.org> wrote:
Ah thanks for = chiming in Wendy!

I expect it's a bit early to get = into details. But it's reassuring to hear that this might be in the = class of things that the IPMC can help with. Is there any prior art for = protocol trademarks that are held by the IPMC?

On Fri, Jul = 17, 2026 at 4:06=E2=80=AFPM Wendy Seltzer <wendy@seltzer.org> wrote:
As an IPMC director, I'm happy = to take questions about the IETF Trust (now IETF Intellectual Property = Management Corporation <https://www.ietf-ipm.org/about/>).

I imagine the board would want to discuss at what stage of standards = development it could be appropriate to accept trademarks, since our core = purpose is to support the Internet standards process. (More than = copyrights, trademarks incur some maintenance obligations, so it's not = as simple to say we'll take anything.)

--Wendy

On July 17, 2026 6:17:58 AM PDT, Daniel Holmgren <daniel=3D40blueskyweb.xyz@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>That would be ideal in my opinion. Though my understanding is that = that
>isn't the intended purpose of the IETF Trust. It's more for = IETF-specific
>marks (like "IETF" for instance) than marks for the protocols = themselves.
>I'll poke around and try to get a clearer answer.
>
>On Fri, Jul 17, 2026 at 3:13=E2=80=AFPM Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> = wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 17, 2026 at 6:09=E2=80=AFAM Maxine S. Fritz = <max=3D2Bietf=3D
>> 40mfzx.net@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Daniel Holmgren <daniel@blueskyweb.xyz> wrote on 2026-07-17 = 08:02:02
>>> -0500:
>>> > Bluesky is also interested in having another entity = (other than
>>> Bluesky) hold and enforce the
>>> > trademark. Though, for practicality's sake, since = Bluesky PBC purchased
>>> the mark and wants to
>>> > provide protection as soon as possible, Bluesky = currently holds and
>>> enforces it.
>>>
>>> Has the IETF Trust (<https://trustee.ietf.org/>) = been considered as a
>>> potential long-term holder
>>> of the ATPROTOCOL trademark? This seems like the natural = choice for an
>>> independent entity
>>> responsible for the trademark corresponding to an IETF = standard.
>>
>>
>> I think this would be a good idea.  Absent this, I think = that we should
>> consider renaming the
>> IETF version of the protocol.
>>
>> -Ekr
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Atp mailing list -- atp@ietf.org
>> To unsubscribe send an email to atp-leave@ietf.org
>>

--
Wendy Seltzer
_______________________________________________
Atp mailing list -- atp@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to atp-leave@ietf.org
_______________________________________________
Atp mailing list -- = atp@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to = atp-leave@ietf.org

= --Apple-Mail=_105FA874-7BFE-4CC3-A1BD-B8FE942824E9--