Re: Proposed IESG Statement on IPR Declarations

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Sat, 09 July 2016 07:35 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.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 E35A912D0EE for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 9 Jul 2016 00:35:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 s3DHEBY9soP8 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 9 Jul 2016 00:35:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x235.google.com (mail-wm0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A605C12B009 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 9 Jul 2016 00:35:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x235.google.com with SMTP id f65so8861951wmi.0 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 00:35:49 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:from:organization:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=SYSGJHVEVFjjjfPFDcPhLCIPfG/mqyr+r7DA2jup0XY=; b=YHDCzNF3L7cHP3ZKth9N2i+i69peJywWgcmFz4DKkfRaBFdQaKvR3T51et3pKI3ZBK c2TywJEvjDDLwEehs0y1CevnSZm6qU5XUsNmc9c1F6Sxa1Qlgq2cxMg+yQfWhV5ZYHPk DcR0MPuK3qo+Qk98enCsDG1LmndaCl6KJfYHBxmLbu30ZeWi7ssY67jUIwH2BTDWJGGh gZPiOe8mMztuZzbA4DbHtxvLLDnEKMXWncnD+htsTz2wSFPnPIBAXQg3e3hCLk/DSzV3 +xulNKmB9IgmaPs/2GBYpNl+TS4WVsgAMh4/ZnL3ZkxW8JfV5pekw+ANHTFpMlkYXzb0 gqyw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=SYSGJHVEVFjjjfPFDcPhLCIPfG/mqyr+r7DA2jup0XY=; b=GlKa2Q3y19EIUtx6q3HKIcFVn59MJgFTfvZynWOBRy5avi6JuuAW2QKYTTgstccTgc W2xeEuivoI0Ge6mQv40aA35knQ3a4nFvr4BDiXppZ0PngAhlPSIjDpF+EiADnLBqemUj c1Ko9cArB3OjKZX6UrXLyKZPlyJ5e8dgf+qllhF/R533nHtuGL4D6lTbk0IluCOu18iG 2b2cC8BnADuo0uqGEMHNbAyRdgNV6pB0kfXTeKnCLdRCoInLEUGGvxwQcIPMvjaf+nsp +Nf7rqXNUeoIKjmmiD2q+sYTH/XWs2QBrHeatvU14iGTdM1jgmFBPzDCHYw0PyWnh9NL BS4Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tKTPCVCypNreqwe6BVFPyS/gbNyauK1cPEBfG9BLEkIwHFa8tJfZmBAKoaa/o4K0w==
X-Received: by 10.28.55.72 with SMTP id e69mr7054897wma.28.1468049747841; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 00:35:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.1.29] (cpc66883-mort6-2-0-cust696.19-2.cable.virginm.net. [92.233.126.185]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u145sm1620476wmu.4.2016.07.09.00.35.46 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 09 Jul 2016 00:35:47 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Proposed IESG Statement on IPR Declarations
To: adrian@olddog.co.uk, ietf@ietf.org
References: <20160707202122.23634.18168.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <0bf601d1d942$3214fc00$963ef400$@olddog.co.uk>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
Message-ID: <329d5ea0-7601-4eca-7780-bf31b57754c5@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 19:36:00 +1200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <0bf601d1d942$3214fc00$963ef400$@olddog.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/InWEAtdQyqzm-HXkonjDr7YQ9kI>
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: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 07:35:52 -0000

"The material posted as IPR disclosures should be viewed as originating
from the source of that information, and any issue or question related
to the material should be directed to the source rather than the IETF.
There is no implied endorsement or agreement by the IETF or the IESG
with any of the material."

I read that text as being a no-op. If there is legal advice that it is not
a no-op, fine, but it should then be added to the boilerplate at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/. But that already says "The IETF takes
no position..." so I think it is a genuine no-op.

Therefore, I suggest dropping the whole thing.

   Brian
On 09/07/2016 05:57, Adrian Farrel wrote:
> AFAICS the only new material is in the final paragraph, although the last sentence is also apparently not new.
> 
> I would advise the IESG to not make a statement in parallel to BCP 79 since alternative wording of the same material will create rather than remove ambiguity. Say new things if they need to be said; revise BCP 79 if it needs to be revised; but don't make statements that look like they are "talking for the sake of talking."
> 
> Adrian
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: IETF-Announce [mailto:ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
>> IESG Secretary
>> Sent: 07 July 2016 21:21
>> To: IETF Announcement List
>> Subject: Proposed IESG Statement on IPR Declarations
>>
>> The IESG is considering an IESG statement on IPR Declarations, and would
>> like to solicit comments from the community on the proposed text. The
>> proposed text is provided below.
>>
>> The IESG will make a decision about this matter shortly. Please provide
>> comments, if any, to ietf@ietf.org or to the IESG at iesg@ietf.org
>> before July 31, 2016.
>>
>> ——
>>
>> IESG Statement on IPR Declarations:
>>
>> BCP 79 discusses Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) within the IETF
>> process and technologies being worked on at the IETF.
>>
>> Among other things, BCP 79 specifies how and when IPR disclosures ought
>> to be made. The purpose of such disclosures is to inform IETF
>> participants and those that use IETF technologies about IPR that may be
>> associated with the technology in question.
>>
>> The IESG also observes that the IETF posts all IPR disclosures (other
>> than obvious spam, which is not an IPR disclosure), as they are
>> received, in our IPR disclosure database. This database is available at
>> https://www.ietf.org/ipr/.
>>
>> However, as noted in BCP 79, the IETF will make no determination about
>> the validity of any particular IPR claim. Neither the IETF nor the IESG
>> makes any attempt to verify patent validity or the validity of any other
>> statements in the IPR disclosure text. As BCP 79, Sec. 4(B) indicates:
>>
>> "The IESG disclaims any responsibility for identifying the
>> existence of or for evaluating the applicability of any IPR,
>> disclosed or otherwise, to any IETF technology, specification or
>> standard, and will take no position on the validity or scope of
>> any such IPR claims."
>>
>> The material posted as IPR disclosures should be viewed as originating
>> from the source of that information, and any issue or question related
>> to the material should be directed to the source rather than the IETF.
>> There is no implied endorsement or agreement by the IETF or the IESG
>> with any of the material.
> 
>