Re: Question regarding trademarks

Jorge Contreras <> Wed, 07 May 2014 15:04 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D8FE1A0893 for <>; Wed, 7 May 2014 08:04:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zvJOG1h4E9rg for <>; Wed, 7 May 2014 08:04:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::22f]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAB1A1A0887 for <>; Wed, 7 May 2014 08:04:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id wo20so1338142obc.20 for <>; Wed, 07 May 2014 08:04:15 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=3eCKvEDyO4ySvjpfJdwhRrL6EFwaufKw+bqNs28AxhM=; b=TBEECVjIX9+vDQjud2B5lK9Mpus7SqYvFmO4aZdjs99al17G4g2SfTR/Z1dk/1LXJs nzlt0ntDyQUC1/yTGtWUE6hMXTLcGE20n5Oud0fuR3D5j7S58ezqZpWYvPcfTWHGaZPm Hx+1O32YBcwpuOleR6im6mw/v5cn5CWFC1xgBUqRSAZrd2vXgd+j6GhBbEtBX4HezTtO 7MkpxuPICuQChzEcXSh8HctmvbQm5mOJx5uqeNYIFUOueBfWXkqwz4swxz5dXjp5Dc60 dTCDbRbvwlwvTtmCMNOKSV19kf8KD+x3bm7aTOh9F4qZjHntaXOeBl7gMb6IeXBLJUAv 8RJw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by with SMTP id o4mr46770089oed.34.1399475055464; Wed, 07 May 2014 08:04:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Wed, 7 May 2014 08:04:15 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <>
Date: Wed, 7 May 2014 10:04:15 -0500
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: Question regarding trademarks
From: Jorge Contreras <>
To: "Fred Baker (fred)" <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01294d0c8d965204f8d0ad19
Cc: "" <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IPR-WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 May 2014 15:04:31 -0000


See Section 3.4 of RFC 5378:

3.4 <>;.  Rights to Use Trademarks

   Contributors may wish to seek trademark or service mark protection on
   any terms that are coined or used in their Contributions.  The IETF
   makes no judgment about the validity of any such trademark rights.
   However, the IETF requires each Contributor, under the licenses
   described in Section 5.3
<> below, to grant the
IETF Trust a perpetual
   license to use any such trademarks or service marks solely in
   exercising rights to reproduce, publish, discuss, and modify the IETF
   Contribution.  This license does not authorize the IETF or others to
   use any trademark or service mark in connection with any product or
   service offering.

On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 7:11 PM, Fred Baker (fred) <>; wrote:

> I just fielded a call from a Cisco colleague, who is working in a
> different (open source) forum, and coming up against an issue relating to a
> trademark. Apparently some company has named something in a product of that
> forum, and is now wanting to assert trademark rights on the name.
> He asked me what the IETF’s policy in such cases might be, knowing that
> there are discussions in the IETF that touch on trademarked intellectual
> property. I couldn’t quickly put my finger on such a policy, although I did
> find a proposed policy in draft-ietf-ipr-trademarks. Thinking out loud, I
> suggested that the party with the trademark would likely need to disclose
> it, and if there was any question on the matter, the IETF might prefer to
> change the name of the standardized technology, as it did between NetFlow
> and IPFIX, if only to avoid confusion. But I’m not sure that’s any more
> than how I might address the issue.
> Do we have a defined policy?
> _______________________________________________
> Ipr-wg mailing list