RE: Community Input Requested on Trustees' Intent to Renounce "IETF Secretariat" Trademark

Abdussalam Baryun <> Tue, 15 April 2014 01:52 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEDD31A02D7; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 18:52:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.701
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id abRVuM3otsI8; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 18:52:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c07::22f]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABB331A024D; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 18:52:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id 131so8220273ykp.20 for <multiple recipients>; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 18:52:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=0Ws4wOSz9/vv4WbM2NaYt5wmlA5s/4GShtawocdAiW8=; b=HfFNI+3pF6yvzqNr2zSadaSAnwWN1da88lpxC5SYns2Rs2ytqeRm4p8NE0nOaslUSm AvgkkZPsFJFFGXW81zH09xA5ahZWlWp18D8GAJILk2j36py04mM0zIJrBL0/dHmykP05 J59rQhhZf6VRIxy9z1MOWU0uBIo/b04GWlyoup7JZY6Z6H3W2qJvI46U72wSv3N4HNfw Mic8Gvm4Czim8PDr5ZDyFDRlSP0UE7KoDTybi8DHiMHCuzRNkmaOQHnTkIIwzbB6iQXm mw/Dsa94Qhdju0u4WxScLv1I3dGDzX0P6uaU+/u6HkzFB+8CfFpe74sry+sv1wnzcNzm 4IvQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by with SMTP id r47mr18239694yhi.83.1397526736850; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 18:52:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 18:52:16 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 02:52:16 +0100
Message-ID: <>
Subject: RE: Community Input Requested on Trustees' Intent to Renounce "IETF Secretariat" Trademark
From: Abdussalam Baryun <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec5468c51b6d4c204f70b0cb6
Cc: "" <>, "" <>, ietf <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 01:52:23 -0000

Comment Date: 15.04.2014

Subject Issue: IETF trademarks and future plans/decisions.
Comment Author: Abdussalam Baryun (AB).
Your request for comments was dated 04.04.2014
The end date of comment period 05.05.2014

Dear Trustees,

I thank you for your request, and would like to see more feedback requests
in the future on this list for at least once per year. IMO the trust
agreement may need some changes in future to involve more
organised feedback but organised by IETF general area participants. It will
be better to involve IETF WGs when requests related to IETF future image. I
am not sure if there is a RFC for that openness and involvement but it will
be good to have in similar request issues.

My feedbacks/comments or opinions/suggestions on the issue are:

0) IMHO the secretariatsIETF is a service mark not a trademark. But IETF is
the registered trademark. Any trademark and organisation logo has its
markets, so hopefully we know our markets.
1) that we IETF need to protect and use our trademarks, and not sure how we
were using the secretariats trademark. If used we should have made some
money from it. You did not report about past benefits from that trademark
within your request. Also what kind of markets was that trademark
2) the IETF trademark should be used in  favour of IETF to cover
its protect expenses. Is there plans for this? I need to know also if there
are future plans. I suggest you make plans available to community because
our feedback needs to stand on some ground otherwise you are asking someone
with no market-history knowledge. I would like to know information of the
markets for all IETF marks if available, then my feedback will be better
3) I don't know who is the current IETF secretariats (it may be because I
think that knowledge will not benefit me). I don't think there is/were a
market plan for that trademark. The IETF web page does not announce
the secretariats name, which can be a form of protection. However, IETF ADs
and IETF chair are well known, so I suggest announcing the name of the
4) many companies use IETF meetings and participate/host but is there
integrated projects among companies using IETF trademark, so that the IETF
general area can establish. Is that situation I think the secretariats
trademark can be helpful. So I hope you define (defined conditions or
situations or markets) when we need or don't need that secretariats
trademark, also that you have a plan when to bring it back registered if
your defined conditions apply.
5) IETF trademark is not really with good standards of trademarks (if we
evaluate it properly). If I compare with IEEE then I may think that whom
responsible are not marketing/planning for IETF marks/logos.

Thanks for your message, wishing you all the best.

Best Regards

> On 4/4/14, IETF Administrative Director <> wrote:
> > All;
> >
> > The Trustees of the IETF Trust have voted an intent to renounce (abandon)
> > the "IETF Secretariat"
> > trademark, but before taking any action they desire to hear from the
> > community.