RIM patents a URN (and ignores IETF IPR rules)

Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com> Thu, 19 November 2009 01:20 UTC

Return-Path: <fluffy@cisco.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 D8F713A67F6 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:20:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.51
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.089, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 0hmIGBUun9+l for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:20:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sj-iport-3.cisco.com (sj-iport-3.cisco.com [171.71.176.72]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17EDE3A6AD0 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:20:08 -0800 (PST)
Authentication-Results: sj-iport-3.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEANMrBEurR7Ht/2dsb2JhbADAbJd9hDsE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.44,768,1249257600"; d="scan'208";a="203290915"
Received: from sj-core-1.cisco.com ([171.71.177.237]) by sj-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 19 Nov 2009 01:20:06 +0000
Received: from [192.168.4.177] (rcdn-fluffy-8711.cisco.com [10.99.9.18]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id nAJ1K5Ao017687 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 01:20:06 GMT
Message-Id: <F064CBF1-597E-493C-A8E2-0EAE1537659C@cisco.com>
From: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>
To: IETF-Discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
Impp: xmpp:cullenfluffyjennings@jabber.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"; delsp="yes"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936)
Subject: RIM patents a URN (and ignores IETF IPR rules)
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 18:20:05 -0700
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936)
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: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 01:20:09 -0000

I'd like to draw peoples attention to the IPR disclosure

https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1213

on

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-montemurro-gsma-imei-urn

The associated patent seems to be

http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=O7qXAAAAEBAJ

Let me point out Mr. Allen is an author of both and a long time  
participant in IETF. Seems the 00 draft was from Oct 2006, the patent  
filed Jun 2005, and it seems we are just getting the IPR disclosure now.

Given there are many ways to solve this sort of problem, and many of  
them are less likely to be IPR encumbered, I'd consider the  
possibility that the IESG should send this to the DISPATCH WG to see  
if they want to work on finding an appropriate solution to it. What do  
other people think the IESG should do with this draft?


Cullen