IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OAUTH-WG] Fw: IPR Disclosure: - What to Do with JWT ?

Leif Johansson <leifj@mnt.se> Thu, 28 February 2013 20:13 UTC

Return-Path: <leifj@mnt.se>
X-Original-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAB5621F89FC for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 12:13:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.733
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.733 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ff3KuYyaXxFv for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 12:13:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-la0-x22a.google.com (mail-la0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::22a]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3F4521F8845 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 12:13:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-la0-f42.google.com with SMTP id fe20so2228916lab.15 for <oauth@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 12:13:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=8KXu85yGHq/pbzFW2Zwkyk6+Z8jq6DgJwmcri7YeUfQ=; b=opFBzfXxLtlZAo/aC1d5hjN2EExfQnqMbAWVxsDfcjdFRBAXCYMBzDQrS4jFLr9yKX XfrG6p/AKwAvy1hN/4m9KiebV/7wMMvEQDR9KHx2YM9blo1Ncktk1tHjhc3/YAlrVhT/ xsLjtYgaq4/LTXetbs0QYdNi2BdmSGtND3xUBSFc9DJoY7+wGrmAh6xX0+Jsm/cxEsDP ada4EELt8RovMSn/VHnaC6iF+fUGuFlrpuQXazDRMQBXDPK9yW8QXkZk/ezXlOsIiY/9 2eJCyeDh8p1KOa9QCh+L5sDOiKtrtM/yMnnCVlXM3tJT0wIOWF2YlQSamnBu7WZRAlDT DGew==
X-Received: by 10.112.28.41 with SMTP id y9mr4083620lbg.133.1362082406698; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 12:13:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.0.0.244] (tb62-102-145-131.cust.teknikbyran.com. [62.102.145.131]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id gm20sm5325292lab.7.2013.02.28.12.13.25 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 28 Feb 2013 12:13:25 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <512FBA63.4060108@mnt.se>
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 21:13:23 +0100
From: Leif Johansson <leifj@mnt.se>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130221 Thunderbird/17.0.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: oauth@ietf.org
References: <1362079266.8952.YahooMailClassic@web141002.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <1362079266.8952.YahooMailClassic@web141002.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------040905060306030803090703"
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnwCCcGd+J6B2ibT1k+C40kwYaAurtDTUA2VEgxNizWnhGuszEZIoKYYkLo2Rd0rQNKzkW8
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Fw: IPR Disclosure: - What to Do with JWT ?
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: OAUTH WG <oauth.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/oauth>, <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth>
List-Post: <mailto:oauth@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>, <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 20:13:29 -0000

On 02/28/2013 08:21 PM, Oleg Gryb wrote:
> Dear OAuth WG and Chairs,
>
> Can somebody please comment the Certicom's disclosure below? If the
> purpose of this disclosure is to inform us that JWT can be potentially
> a subject of royalties and other possible legal actions, the value of
> adopting JWT in the scope of OAuth 2.0 IETF standard would definitely
> diminish and if this is the case shouldn't we consider replacing it
> with something similar, but different, which would not be a subject of
> the future possible litigation?   
>
> I'm not a lawyer and might not understand the statement below
> correctly, so please let me know if/where I'm wrong. Please keep in
> mind also that the popularity of JWT is growing fast along with the
> implementations, so we need to do something quickly.
>
I'm curious too.

Skimming through the summaries on google patents of the cited patents I
couldn't immediately see
the relationship with JWTs but then again I'm not a patent lawyer (nor
do I play one on the net).

        Cheers Leif

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email