Re: I-D Action: draft-bradner-rfc3979bis-08.txt

"Scott O. Bradner" <sob@sobco.com> Wed, 30 March 2016 20:32 UTC

Return-Path: <sob@sobco.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FD9D12D947 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Mar 2016 13:32:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.109
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.109 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6NuUfYrB9-70 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Mar 2016 13:32:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sobco.sobco.com (unknown [136.248.127.164]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B3CB712D517 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Mar 2016 13:32:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sobco.sobco.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68E1C1A4B10F; Wed, 30 Mar 2016 16:32:12 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at sobco.com
Received: from sobco.sobco.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (sobco.sobco.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yLz25YhgQe_r; Wed, 30 Mar 2016 16:32:10 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [10.0.1.16] (173-166-5-69-newengland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.166.5.69]) by sobco.sobco.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DA1021A4B100; Wed, 30 Mar 2016 16:32:09 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
Subject: Re: I-D Action: draft-bradner-rfc3979bis-08.txt
From: "Scott O. Bradner" <sob@sobco.com>
In-Reply-To: <56FC3339.2030801@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2016 16:32:15 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <B90D9695-4476-489D-9663-1485B30365B5@sobco.com>
References: <20160321144919.31961.89334.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <36BAA6A693139D4BBCB37CCCA660E08A14FB3369@eusaamb101.ericsson.se> <56FC3339.2030801@gmail.com>
To: Michael Cameron <michael.cameron@ericsson.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/DXM3OqiRq4tr-sPdPO3cmfn8rbQ>
Cc: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Wed, 30 Mar 2016 20:32:18 -0000

this is a legal issue - the language comes from a long ago US court case

in addition to what Brian brings out 

“reasonably’ also refers to what someone should, by their job, know - i.e. a company
can not purposely keep someone in the dark to avoid disclosure requirements

Scott

> On Mar 30, 2016, at 4:12 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On 31/03/2016 06:01, Michael Cameron wrote:
> ...
>> To clarify this, I would propose deleting the phrase "reasonably and" in Section 5.1.2.
> 
> I would object very strongly to this deletion. We have always said "reasonably and
> personally known" to make it clear that nobody is expected to go to unreasonable
> lengths to discover the existence of IPR. For anyone who works for a large company,
> it is clearly unreasonable for them to be aware of all IPR owned by that company,
> and this phrase covers that case nicely, especially given that we all participate
> and contribute here as individuals, even if we happen to use a corporate email
> address. This phrase has stood the test of time and should not be changed.
> 
> ...
>> 
> 
> Regards
>   Brian
>