Ongoing validity of IPR Claims

[t petch <[e-mail]>]

Does an IPR claim update or obsolete or ... do anything to a previous 
IPR claim against an I-D?

e.g. draft-ietf-i2nsf-consumer-facing-interface-dm
IPR claim 3554 was submitted in 4jun19 against -04 sections 9 and 10 
with Possible Royalty/Fee.  This was unacceptable to the WG as the 
e-mail archive shows. After it was pointed out how other organisations 
used reciprocity, which was more generally acceptable, a revised claim, 
3604, was submitted with reciprocity and the WG deemed that sufficient 
for the work to proceed.

I commented 2mar22 against a later version, -16,  but before I had seen 
a revised I-D, IPR claim 5694 was submitted 21jun22 against 06-09 
sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 (which includes IANA and Security 
Considerations) with Possible Royalty/Fee.  I pointed out that this was 
not acceptable in 2019 and did not see it being so now.

A revised claim 5749 was submitted 18jul22 against 06-09 sections 4, 5, 
6, 7, 8, 9, 10.  Meanwhile the I-D is up to revision -22.

So, what claims are now in force against which sections of what versions 
of this I-D?

I can see nothing in a later claim saying that the previous Royalty/Fee 
claim is no longer valid.  There is also a discrepancy between the 
sections in 5694 and 5749; and then which revisions are affected?

I have seen claims in other WG issued against each version of an I-D in 
turn with consistent conditions and consistent references to the I-D in 
question.

I find it disappointing that when a Possible Royalty/Fee was 
unacceptable in 2019 such a claim should be made in 2021, at WGLC.

I am not a lawyer, at least not in IPR, and do not have access to advice 
so any lay thoughts would be helpful.

Tom Petch