[codec] IPR situation of SPIRIT DPS's Contribution to the IETF and to the Codec WG
Stephan Wenger <stewe@stewe.org> Tue, 23 March 2010 18:02 UTC
Return-Path: <stewe@stewe.org>
X-Original-To: codec@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: codec@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CA663A6C26 for <codec@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 11:02:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 2.528
X-Spam-Level: **
X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.528 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, DNS_FROM_OPENWHOIS=1.13, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WAuCyt8-1lVo for <codec@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 11:02:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stewe.org (stewe.org [85.214.122.234]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F88A3A6CF7 for <codec@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 11:02:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.27.171.108] (unverified [207.88.181.2]) by stewe.org (SurgeMail 3.9e) with ESMTP id 623201-1743317 for multiple; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 19:02:25 +0100
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.23.0.091001
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 11:02:01 -0700
From: Stephan Wenger <stewe@stewe.org>
To: Codec WG <codec@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <C7CE5029.205BF%stewe@stewe.org>
Thread-Topic: IPR situation of SPIRIT DPS's Contribution to the IETF and to the Codec WG
Thread-Index: AcrKsu/SrHqyoD/2s0qwOf8sO5imAA==
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="B_3352186944_1078007"
X-Originating-IP: 207.88.181.2
X-Authenticated-User: stewe@stewe.org
Cc: yudin@spiritdsp.com, Slava Borilin <Borilin@spiritdsp.com>, vladimirs@spiritdsp.com
Subject: [codec] IPR situation of SPIRIT DPS's Contribution to the IETF and to the Codec WG
X-BeenThere: codec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Codec WG <codec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec>, <mailto:codec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/codec>
List-Post: <mailto:codec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:codec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec>, <mailto:codec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 18:02:37 -0000
Hi all, Wearing my ³technical advisor to the IESG on IPR matters² hat: Following the pattern of yesterday¹s face-to-face session, I want to provide you with my impression of the current BCP 79 compliance situation regarding the IP-MR codec. The specification of the IP-MR codec has been made available to the IETF in the form of an Internet around October 14, 2009; see http://tools.ietf.org/search/draft-spiritdsp-ipmr-00. This undoubtly constitutes a Contribution to the IETF and triggers Note Well and the relevant provisions in BCP 79. The draft is co-authored by Vladimir Sviridenko and Dmitry Yudin. Slava Borilin has extensively commented on the draft as well. It is my understanding of BCP79 that the three mentioned individuals are under the obligation to disclose any patents they are reasonably and personally aware of that relate to the IP-MR draft, to the IETF, using the IETF¹s IPR tracker system. If there were such patents, I would recommend that the disclosures be made at their earliest convenience; within a month would, to me, be an appropriate timeline; faster would be appreciated. The mechanisms for making disclosures are described in BCP 79 and references therein. This disclosure would be required even if Spirit DSP were willing to make all their patent available under commercial terms they consider agreeable to everyone, and if they were communicating that intent by other means. I will note, though, that at least Slava has argued in the past towards an unencumbered codec. Perhaps there are no Spirit DSP patents, or other patents, that the three Contributors are reaonsably and personally aware of that relate to their Contributions. BCP 79 does not contain a policy requirement to make negative statements; that is statements to the extent that the aforementioned individuals are not aware of related patents. If Slava, Vladimir, and Dmitry were not reasonably and personally aware of patents related to their IETF Contributions, they do not need to file a disclosure, nor say anything related to patents in public. Silence on patent matters is the default in the IETF, both by policy and in practice. That said, I can imagine that a clarifying negative statement on this mailing list would probably be appreciated by many WG participants. Keeping all this in mind, it is my current impression that Slava, Vladimir, and Dmitry, as well as Spirit DSP, are in compliance with BCP 79, because none of them, based on my current inferred knowledge, are reasonably and personally aware of patents related to their draft. If any of them were, I would request and recommend that a disclosure be filed at your earliest convenience, and I would be willing to assist with the logistics. Regards, Stephan
- [codec] IPR situation of SPIRIT DPS's Contributio… Stephan Wenger