Re: clarification of blanket statement text

On 2/18/2005 20:29, Contreras, Jorge allegedly wrote:
> Under 6.4.3, a participant can satisfy its disclosure
> obligations by making a "blanket" statement
> that it is willing to license all of its potential
> IPR covering an IETF specification ONLY if 
> 	
> 	(a) the license will be royalty-free, AND
> 
> 	(b) any other terms and conditions of the
> license are disclosed in an IPR disclosure statement.
> 
> No other "blanket" statements of licensing intention
> satisfy the participant's disclosure obligations under 3668.  
> Thus, if a participant states that it is willing to
> license all of its IPR on a RAND basis, the statement
> is not compliant.  
> 
> The participant who wants to grant RAND licenses 
> must comply with the
> specific disclosure rules in 6.4.1 and elsewhere.
> 
> If that was the intention, then the language works
> as written.  If not, then it can be fixed.
> However, I'm not sure I understand the problem that's
> being identified.
> 
> Jorge

We've nailed the RAND one, but going back to the original problem --
what if a blanket statement says "no license required"?

_______________________________________________
Ipr-wg mailing list
Ipr-wg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg