Re: Last Call: <draft-polk-ipr-disclosure-03.txt> (Promoting Compliance with Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Disclosure Rules) to Informational RFC

[Peter Saint-Andre <[e-mail]>]

Hi Stephan, thanks for the feedback and sorry about the slow reply.

On 4/30/12 11:19 AM, Stephan Wenger wrote:
> Hi,
> Here are a few comments to this draft.
> Stephan
> 
> (1) Section 3.1, final paragraph.  An IETF disclosure has to be made
> against a Contribution.  In the case described in this paragraph, the
> Contribution may not have been made at the time of the Disclosure request,
> and, therefore, it would be impossible to make a Disclosure.  For example,
> if someone wants to discuss a technology verbally, you cannot make an IPR
> disclosure before the words have been uttered.  I would remove this
> paragraph.  Alternatively, limit it to "materials you plan to make
> available at the meeting" in the sprit it of section 4.1.

I see your point: one can't realistically be expected to file a
disclosure before making a Contribution. Tim and I will discuss together
how we'd like to make this clearer. One possibility is to use a less
formal method, e.g., providing information about known IPR in the
materials to be presented or posting to the relevant discussion list
ahead of time (rather than filing a formal disclosure).

> (2) Section 3.2, "silence may be interpreted as a weak "No".".  This
> statement is IMO not supported by the IETF patent policy, and should
> therefore be removed.  Generally speaking, any additional burden to
> non-Contributors beyond making them aware of the voluntary disclosure
> opportunity IMP constitutes a policy change and must be avoided.

I think you're right that absence of evidence can't be interpreted as
evidence of absence. If Tim agrees, we'll stike that sentence.

> (3) Section 3.3.  I would replace "author" with "authors and other
> Contributors".  Or "known Contributors", "prominent Contributors", or
> something like this.  It is entirely possible, and in fact not uncommon,
> that non-author Contributors influence the technology choices of I-Ds.
> One possible metric for identifying some of these Contributors would be a
> review of the Acknowledgement section many I-Ds include.  I see this
> mentioned in section 3.4; I would shift (or duplicate?) the burden of
> double-checking with Contributors to the WG chairs as WGLC.

Your suggestion of "authors and other Contributors" seems right.

> (4) Section 4.2.  Suggest to include Contributors in the spirit of comment
> (3) above.

Agreed.

> (5) Section A.1.  The email has a logical structure, but sometimes a
> logical structure may not have the best effect.  As written, people will
> probably not read it in its entirety, but will give up once its clear that
> it includes legalese.  Suggest to move the final paragraph "As FOO WG
> chairs" to the top, and put the formal justification stuff at the end.
> 
> (6) Section A.2: I would substitute "Dear FOO WG" with "Dear FOO WG and
> especially authors and Contributors:"
> 
> (7) Section A.2, third paragraph, sentence "We will not be able to advance
> this document to the next stage until we have received a reply from each
> author and listed contributor."  If this sentence starts appearing with
> some consistency in IETF WGs, then we have a de-facto policy change
> (requiring affirmative negative declarations).  Suggest to soften the
> language: "we may not be able to advance" or "it does not appear to be
> sensible to us to advance"
> 
> (8) Section A.2, fourth paragraph: I would express this along the
> following: "you are reminded of your opportunity for a voluntary IPR
> disclosure under BCP79 section xxx.  Unless you want to make such a
> voluntary disclosure, please do not reply."
> 
> (9) Section A.3, see previous comments (7) and (8).
>  
> (10) Section A.4, see previous comment (7)
> 
> (11) Section A.5, see previous comment (7)

Thanks for those suggestions. We'll look at those sample messages again,
but on a first look I think all your points are spot-on.

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/