Re: RIM patents using a mime body in a message (and ignores IETF IPR rules)

Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org> Mon, 30 November 2009 15:12 UTC

Return-Path: <simon@josefsson.org>
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8475C3A68E6 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Nov 2009 07:12:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.484
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.484 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.115, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 8VtIlQbRhGtf for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Nov 2009 07:12:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from yxa-v.extundo.com (yxa-v.extundo.com [83.241.177.39]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79CA43A695A for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 30 Nov 2009 07:12:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mocca.josefsson.org (c80-216-24-211.bredband.comhem.se [80.216.24.211]) (authenticated bits=0) by yxa-v.extundo.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5) with ESMTP id nAUFBedZ005479 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 30 Nov 2009 16:11:45 +0100
From: Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: RIM patents using a mime body in a message (and ignores IETF IPR rules)
References: <487AB12E-FD4A-4AD5-8641-17B4B64C6F8F@cisco.com> <4B04A9C5.6060904@gmail.com> <5F5E5CDB0670267DF04D9561@PST.JCK.COM> <01NG9VCEWETC0002QL@mauve.mrochek.com> <A6741735F236784CBB00AAD60DCED23F034FE5CB@XCH02DFW.rim.net> <20091120151251.B04DCF2403F@odin.smetech.net> <87iqd1v9qq.fsf@mocca.josefsson.org> <4B0A8B41.30005@gmail.com> <20091123124442.46510698@gg1.cs.columbia.edu> <4B11A797.5080905@gmail.com>
OpenPGP: id=B565716F; url=http://josefsson.org/key.txt
X-Hashcash: 1:22:091130:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com::4GPVKkAh6NI+4JMK:0FAh
X-Hashcash: 1:22:091130:scott.brim@gmail.com::3E0c5xzGCUblYQ8o:AG9m
X-Hashcash: 1:22:091130:ietf@ietf.org::MOdq3CVRaEDX45Le:k47u
X-Hashcash: 1:22:091130:smb@cs.columbia.edu::+Cqn4fIL81WjI1l9:ohWJ
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 16:11:40 +0100
In-Reply-To: <4B11A797.5080905@gmail.com> (Brian E. Carpenter's message of "Sun, 29 Nov 2009 11:43:35 +1300")
Message-ID: <871vjgujwz.fsf@mocca.josefsson.org>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Cc: Scott Brim <scott.brim@gmail.com>, ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 15:12:31 -0000

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> writes:

> On 2009-11-24 06:44, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
>> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 08:16:49 -0500
>> Scott Brim <scott.brim@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Simon Josefsson allegedly wrote on 11/23/2009 5:03 AM:
>>>> John-Luc said he is bound by confidentiality obligations from his
>>>> company, and I think the same applies to most employees of larger
>>>> organizations.  There is nothing explicit in BCP 79 to protect
>>>> against this apparent conflict of interest, or is there?
>>>    Since disclosure is required
>>>    for anyone submitting documents or participating in IETF
>>> discussions, a person who does not disclose IPR for this reason, or
>>> any other reason, must not contribute to or participate in IETF
>>> activities with respect to technologies that he or she reasonably and
>>> personally knows to be Covered by IPR which he or she will not
>>> disclose.
>>>
>> Precisely.  The conflict Simon mentions was of course known to most of
>> the WG; that's one reason we have that clause.
>
> IMHO, BCP79 creates no particular problem for corporate lawyers who
> are instructed by their corporate management to ensure that the company
> behaves as a good citizen in its standards activities. This is strongly
> in the company's interests, anyway, since failure to disclose when
> required by a standards process threatens the validity of the patent.

There is no requirement in the IETF process for organizations to
disclose patents as far as I can see.  The current approach of only
having people participate, and disclose patents, in the IETF is easy to
work around by having two persons in an organization doing different
things: one works on specifying and standardizing technology, and the
other is working on patenting the technology.

> It really is not the IETF's problem. It is a problem for a company that
> chooses not to behave as a good citizen.

The situation remains that the IETF does not have any mechanism to apply
pressure on organizations to disclose patent information.

/Simon