Re: IPR disclosures for individual submissions

[Harald Alvestrand <[e-mail]>]

The formal rules are reasonably clear: Once the IPR disclosure is filed, 
the responsibility of the person who knows about the IPR is over.

There is no formal statement about who has the responsibility to notice 
that IPR has been filed and make a judgment about whether it matters or 
not; I suspect (using common sense) that this SHOULD be done by the WG 
chair before submission to the IESG in the case of WG submissions, and 
by the AD processing the request-to-publish in the case of individual 
submissions - and discussion should go wherever discussion of technical 
issues with the document goes.

But I do not think that there are words written down anywhere with this 
advice, nor do I think this is current practice.

Note also draft-savola-ipr-lastcall; this was a proposal to tie IPR 
disclosures formally with Last Calls, and was discussed at the genarea 
meeting in November 2004, but the conclusion from that meeting was:

Sense of room

    * Should this draft be adopted as a process the IETF should follow?
      about three people.
    * draft should be removed from consideration? about twenty people.
    * should do something about this problem? almost certainly (applause
      for Pekka)

(this is from http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/04nov/ - good minute-taking!)

I don't have a recollection of this being pursued after that.

                                     Harald

Sam Hartman wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I'd appreciate some help on how to handle IPR disclosures for
> individual documents.
>
> First, I'd like to understand how this is to work in a WG because
> there seems to be disagreement among at least two IESG members about
> how this works.
>
> It was my impression that WGs actually needed to discuss IPR claims
> against their documents and that they needed to make a decision the
> IPR was acceptable.
>
> Another IESG member believes it is sufficient to file the disclosure
> and if no one brings up the issue in the WG then there is no problem.
>
> Is it sufficient to simply file a disclosure or should the issue actually be discussed in the WG?
>
> Assuming that a discussion needs to happen in the WG,how should we
> handle this for individual submissions?
> Here are some possible options:
>
> * Filing the disclosure is sufficient--if no one bothers to check and
>   the ADs don't think there is a problem, then there is no issue.  I
>   don't like this option because I don't think many people check IPR
>   disclosures and I'd rather have more than just two ADs think about
>   the IPR for a spec.
>
> * Call it out in the last call announcement.
>
> * Discuss within the IESG.
>
> Are there other options?  How should this be handled?
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ipr-wg mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg
>
>   


_______________________________________________
Ipr-wg mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg