Re: RIM patents using a mime body in a message (and ignores IETF IPR rules)

John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> Fri, 20 November 2009 05:29 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
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 7FB043A6817 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 21:29:05 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -19.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-19.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HABEAS_ACCREDITED_SOI=-4.3, RCVD_IN_BSP_TRUSTED=-4.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 vz2fhgHcJgJa for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 21:29:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [208.31.42.53]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C96EE3A6823 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 21:29:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 91432 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2009 05:28:58 -0000
Received: from mail1.iecc.com (208.31.42.56) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 20 Nov 2009 05:28:58 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:cc:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=k0910; olt=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=h4QOi/pKdtsy0pKwSPriZXK4NcESqb3FHU77+C3l24A=; b=exrE1IjV8akHQqia37sOIYHlLEKT5N9OmxeKvwxwNCS9cRwawyzCYOg3UoPHsm6IYLai2GLifonuZV18NE7XxAyAPlUuZMnTnU3O4q6eHs9cQzNBfkw9nI+7/eexmowNGh0Mkh4FFqb1eDGBOGhXSOzc3LIfXrtoC/D4e1k8eeo=
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 05:28:58 -0000
Message-ID: <20091120052858.6926.qmail@simone.iecc.com>
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: RIM patents using a mime body in a message (and ignores IETF IPR rules)
In-Reply-To: <1258630815.6382.186.camel@scott>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
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-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, 20 Nov 2009 05:29:05 -0000

>> The associated patent, filed Oct 2008, is at
>> http://www.google.com/patents?id=Mk7GAAAAEBAJ
>> 
>> and the related draft is
>> 
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bakker-sipping-3gpp-ims-xml-body-handling
>
>Quite aside from the question of what the IESG should do about the
>registration, my reading of this patent ...

Not to belabor the obvious, but this is not a patent.  It is a patent
APPLICATION.  No patent has been issued.  Indeed, it sounds like no
patent should be issued.

The PTO has a protest process that appears appropriate in this
situation.  You can file a protest including prior art with an
explanation of how it relates to the application which will be
included with the application for the examiner.

The rules are quite strict.  See here for details:

http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/documents/1900_1901.htm

R's,
John