Re: [Geopriv] IPR disclosure on draft-ietf-geopriv-deref-protocol

I agree.  I have read the patent and do not believe there is a problem with respect to implementing deref.  I suppose it would be possible to use deref to build a system which violates the patent, but I believe that most uses won't, and therefore I think we should proceed.

IANAL

Brian

On Jul 19, 2012, at 4:09 PM, Richard L. Barnes wrote:

> <hat type="individual" />
> 
> Having read the patent, I do not think that it is required to implement draft-ietf-geopriv-deref-protocol.  As I understand it, the patent covers a location-based access control system, which could use deref, but which is not a requirement of deref.
> 
> So I would be OK with deref proceeding in spite of this IPR claim.
> 
> --Richard
> 
> 
> 
> On Jul 19, 2012, at 3:57 PM, Richard L. Barnes wrote:
> 
>> Dear GEOPRIV,
>> 
>> An IPR disclosure has been filed against a GEOPPRIV document, draft-ietf-geopriv-deref-protocol.  This document has been through working group last call, IETF last call, and IESG approval.  Its last DISCUSS was cleared 12 July 2012, but Robert is delaying final approval until this IPR question has been resolved.
>> 
>> Please send comment to the list by Friday, 20 July 2012, if you have concerns related to this IPR disclosure.  
>> 
>> Note that the patent disclosed in this disclosure was also disclosed with regard to other GEOPRIV documents that proceeded to publication:
>> RFC 3693: <https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/960/>
>> RFC 4079: <https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/959/>
>> RFC 4119: <https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/958/>
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> GEOPRIV Chairs 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Geopriv mailing list
>> Geopriv@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Geopriv mailing list
> Geopriv@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv