IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Proposed Update to Note Well

Stephan Wenger <stewe@stewe.org> Fri, 22 June 2012 16:03 UTC

Return-Path: <stewe@stewe.org>
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 A216321F870A; Fri, 22 Jun 2012 09:03:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LPRhwbrhwAXT; Fri, 22 Jun 2012 09:03:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from am1outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com (am1ehsobe002.messaging.microsoft.com [213.199.154.205]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89D5321F874F; Fri, 22 Jun 2012 09:03:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail13-am1-R.bigfish.com (10.3.201.238) by AM1EHSOBE005.bigfish.com (10.3.204.25) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.225.23; Fri, 22 Jun 2012 16:02:15 +0000
Received: from mail13-am1 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail13-am1-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A1CB20256; Fri, 22 Jun 2012 16:02:15 +0000 (UTC)
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:157.56.240.133; KIP:(null); UIP:(null); IPV:NLI; H:BL2PRD0710HT004.namprd07.prod.outlook.com; RD:none; EFVD:NLI
X-SpamScore: -1
X-BigFish: PS-1(zzbb2dI98dI9371I1432Izz1202h1082kzzz2fh2a8h668h839h944he5bhf0ah)
Received-SPF: pass (mail13-am1: domain of stewe.org designates 157.56.240.133 as permitted sender) client-ip=157.56.240.133; envelope-from=stewe@stewe.org; helo=BL2PRD0710HT004.namprd07.prod.outlook.com ; .outlook.com ;
Received: from mail13-am1 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail13-am1 (MessageSwitch) id 1340380932611852_17977; Fri, 22 Jun 2012 16:02:12 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from AM1EHSMHS006.bigfish.com (unknown [10.3.201.235]) by mail13-am1.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F41B160049; Fri, 22 Jun 2012 16:02:12 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from BL2PRD0710HT004.namprd07.prod.outlook.com (157.56.240.133) by AM1EHSMHS006.bigfish.com (10.3.207.106) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.225.23; Fri, 22 Jun 2012 16:02:10 +0000
Received: from BL2PRD0710MB349.namprd07.prod.outlook.com ([169.254.1.88]) by BL2PRD0710HT004.namprd07.prod.outlook.com ([10.255.102.39]) with mapi id 14.16.0164.004; Fri, 22 Jun 2012 16:03:33 +0000
From: Stephan Wenger <stewe@stewe.org>
To: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>, Noel Chiappa <jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Proposed Update to Note Well
Thread-Topic: Proposed Update to Note Well
Thread-Index: AQHNUI4UF8urOkUi9ECLOMdvpukpJJcGfKEA//+OCQA=
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 16:03:32 +0000
Message-ID: <CC09E33B.88542%stewe@stewe.org>
In-Reply-To: <4FE4947A.7040905@stpeter.im>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.255.102.5]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <8D5C019B411B844EBCF09A8432328FA2@namprd07.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: stewe.org
Cc: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>, "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <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: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 16:03:47 -0000

Strike "actively".  It's a loophole and adds no value.

I don't know how a "contribution" can be "controlled" by
a patent.  

Using "related" as the broadest possible term that IMO
may just be supported by BCP79:

   "If you believe  that a patent controlled by your employer
   or sponsor is related to your contribution, then you must
   disclose that patent."

I'm quite sure that the term "believe" is appropriate.  It's not
the Note Well that allows trucks go through, it's BCP79.  However,
ignoring my own advice (stick to terminology used in BCP79) I may
settle for "aware of":
   
   "If you are aware of a patent controlled by your employer
   or sponsor that is related to your contribution, then you must
   disclose that patent."


Stephan


On 6.22.2012 08:51 , "Peter Saint-Andre" <stpeter@stpeter.im> wrote:

>On 6/22/12 9:45 AM, Noel Chiappa wrote:
>>     > From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>>
>>
>>     > And somehow we also lost the point about "you know" or "you
>>believe"
>>     > along the way.
>> 
>> That was deliberate. To me, "believe" is a loophole big enough to drive
>>a
>> truck through. 
>
>You're right. I was just trying to incorporate consensus. ;-)
>
>So:
>
>   By participating here, you agree to follow IETF processes.
>
>   If you actively contribute and you know that your contribution
>   is controlled by patents, you need to disclose that.
>
>   You understand that meetings might be recorded and broadcast.
>
>   Refer to <foo> for details.
>
>/psa
>
>

v2.20.0 | Report a Bug | By Email