Re: several messages

Dean Anderson <dean@av8.com> Wed, 13 August 2008 19:26 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B40F28C198; Wed, 13 Aug 2008 12:26:13 -0700 (PDT)
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 199733A6A48; Wed, 13 Aug 2008 12:26:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.225
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.225 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.374, 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 DfVyvzZgMa3v; Wed, 13 Aug 2008 12:26:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cirrus.av8.net (cirrus.av8.net [130.105.36.66]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D716C3A6CF1; Wed, 13 Aug 2008 12:26:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from citation2.av8.net (citation2.av8.net [130.105.12.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by cirrus.av8.net (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m7DJPwT6025072 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Wed, 13 Aug 2008 15:25:58 -0400
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 15:25:57 -0400
From: Dean Anderson <dean@av8.com>
X-X-Sender: dean@citation2.av8.net
To: "Contreras, Jorge" <Jorge.Contreras@wilmerhale.com>, Lawrence Rosen <lrosen@rosenlaw.com>, Scott Brim <swb@employees.org>
Subject: Re: several messages
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0808131301170.4507-100000@citation2.av8.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0808131512220.4507-100000@citation2.av8.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: chair@ietf.org, IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>, ipr-wg@ietf.org, Carl Wallace <CWallace@cygnacom.com>
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-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>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

> > How can a description of how to use a technology infringe on a patent?
>
> A standard isn't merely a description, as in a magazine article, but
> also represents an industry agreement on the definition of a product. A
> draft or WG could encourage persons to violate a patent, which is
> indirect infringement.  A draft or WG could define a product that is a
> contributory infringement on a patent.  The working group must take care
> not to do these things.

As I said before, I agree with Atty Rosen's position and I hope it will
prevail, I have run into lawyers who assert that source code
distribution does infringe a patent.

In the source code distribution examples that I know of, the
distributors were very clear about the existance of patents in certain
jurisdictions, and therefore seemed to have prudently (I would hope
sufficiently prudently)  avoided indirect infringement.  But it also
seems indisputable that there are indeed scenarios of imprudent actions
which could invoke indirect or contributory infringement.

There doesn't seem to be any basis for the assertion that it is entirely
impossible for the IETF to ever engage in indirect or contributory
infringement, no matter what actions it undertakes or how imprudent
those actions are.  So I think the IETF must define policies so to avoid
the scenarios of imprudent actions.

		--Dean


-- 
Av8 Internet   Prepared to pay a premium for better service?
www.av8.net         faster, more reliable, better service
617 344 9000   




_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf