Re: Proposed IESG Statement on IPR Declarations

Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> Fri, 08 July 2016 16:20 UTC

Return-Path: <lear@cisco.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 F120B12D7FA; Fri, 8 Jul 2016 09:20:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.947
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.947 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 9asriYO55YfK; Fri, 8 Jul 2016 09:20:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aer-iport-1.cisco.com (aer-iport-1.cisco.com [173.38.203.51]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9305712D7B8; Fri, 8 Jul 2016 09:20:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=5840; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1467994821; x=1469204421; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=gEjw6foMkEKDtlCyH/TioOplpcctF/j2b1tYpXf3RBA=; b=IHPCNstP79OzJsLmO+JhW/75FT+Nc6AmX4SGSGUJthMo7wrOgjHhnkWq FGsgZ8bqGiKqFCL46BdGcMSnQNUJnyWxymPApj7Mbpgjyvs4cCPdPHUX6 q5qhHJ2ja4wn+wilFxjuu6zg08E0e9BUm5P5yhXNZtJ3GPPtugqXhxjzB 0=;
X-Files: signature.asc : 481
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0DoBADT0X9X/xbLJq1bhD5StBCCdYIPgXuGGAKBYBQBAQEBAQEBZSeETQEFI1YQCwQUKgICVwYBDAYCAQEQiByubo8tAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBDg6EZIM7glWHQoJaAQSZFIMygWyJMYFqhFiDCyOFPJAOHjaDczoyiTIBAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.28,330,1464652800"; d="asc'?scan'208,217";a="678154656"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-1.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 08 Jul 2016 16:20:19 +0000
Received: from [10.61.96.46] (dhcp-10-61-96-46.cisco.com [10.61.96.46]) by aer-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u68GKJij005949; Fri, 8 Jul 2016 16:20:19 GMT
Subject: Re: Proposed IESG Statement on IPR Declarations
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
References: <20160707202122.23634.18168.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAC4RtVAEQfWN-xgtrDS0kKg6EV22hdskJKL++vsp80vi0XOjUA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <317d2c1a-5c87-d2a4-f03b-de8592530a37@cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2016 18:20:19 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAC4RtVAEQfWN-xgtrDS0kKg6EV22hdskJKL++vsp80vi0XOjUA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="8Dl1H9jvL8BW1LqcJ6APVeofMfmQCpUTC"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/XwK7z5pdyq2aj7MCTivYP0MJH2I>
Cc: IESG <iesg@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: Fri, 08 Jul 2016 16:20:32 -0000

Hi Barry,


On 7/8/16 5:34 PM, Barry Leiba wrote:
>> 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.
> The statement below seems to amount to "The IESG has nothing to do
> with IPR disclosures," and nothing more.  I don't understand why the
> IESG wants to put that out as an IESG Statement, rather than, say,
> posting it prominently on the IPR disclosure pages (where people who
> need to see it might actually see it), and making sure that it also
> covers the IAB, and maybe the IAOC, ISOC, and the IETF Secretariat.

If I read correctly between the lines, and one must do that since the
IESG has not been clear as to why they wish to issue the statement, the
IESG is saying that they do not want the IETF to be used as a football
in a court case as being in some way dispositive about whether or not
IPR is valid.  And that is all well and good because**very few of us are
actually lawyers.  I cannot, however, evaluate whether or not such a
statement actually accomplishes that goal.  I'm not a lawyer.  I could
also imagine some WG participants falsely extrapolating from this draft
statement that they may not raise a discussion about IPR.  I believe the
statement should be clearer  as to its intent and on this point.

Eliot