Re: [OAUTH-WG] IPR on OAuth bearer

[Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>]

Hi Mike,

On 05/09/2012 08:34 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:
> On 05/09/2012 12:17 PM, Eran Hammer wrote:
>> Whoever you talk to for legal advice about IPR issues related to
>> standards you might implement. My only point is, this group is not
>> qualified to comment on IPR matters.
> 
> The IETF gets to decide whether it wants to create standards that
> use (potentially) encumbered IP. It is the wg's responsibility to
> decide whether it is a necessary evil, or whether the damage can be
> routed around. How a working group does that without having a
> discussion is a mystery to me.

Yeah, its tricky stuff. The key point as I understand it is
not to get into discussion about licensing arrangements or
other commercial matters, nor about the validity of the IPR
itself, which are not our business. While we may or may not
have opinions that 90+% of the output of all patent offices
in the ICT space is pure rubbish, those are not directly
relevant for the WG. If you're not sure, ask the chairs or
me and we can try help.

The question is as Hannes stated: does this new information
change the WG's opinion of this document or not. Silence is
taken to mean "not" in this case.

S

> 
> Mike
> 
>>
>> EH
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Michael Thomas [mailto:[e-mail]]
>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 12:15 PM
>>> To: Eran Hammer
>>> Cc: Hannes Tschofenig; [e-mail] WG
>>> Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] IPR on OAuth bearer
>>>
>>> On 05/09/2012 12:06 PM, Eran Hammer wrote:
>>>> So no discussion of this is expected on the list - correct? That's
>>>> what I
>>> wanted to clarify. You asked the WG to "think" about its potential
>>> implications but I don't want that "thinking" to happen out-loud on
>>> this list...
>>>> Raising the issue with your internal IPR team is the right step.
>>> What internal IPR team? The IETF is not a corpro-only club.
>>>
>>> Mike
>>>> EH
>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Hannes Tschofenig [mailto:[e-mail]]
>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 11:37 AM
>>>>> To: Eran Hammer
>>>>> Cc: Hannes Tschofenig; [e-mail] WG
>>>>> Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] IPR on OAuth bearer
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Eran,
>>>>>
>>>>> if you care about the specification (and want to use it in your
>>>>> products) then you may want to reach out to your IPR folks and ask for
>>> their judgement.
>>>>> They may be able to tell you whether they find the cited IPR
>>>>> applicable and whether they had experience with the IPR holder
>>>>> already.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ciao
>>>>> Hannes
>>>>>
>>>>> On May 9, 2012, at 8:51 PM, Eran Hammer wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> What exactly is the expected WG discussion on this? I hope people
>>>>>> here
>>>>> are not expected to read the patent and make legal decisions about
>>>>> the patent's validity or even applicability as these are questions
>>>>> for lawyers, not engineers.
>>>>>> EH
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On
>>>>>>> Behalf Of Hannes Tschofenig
>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 10:44 AM
>>>>>>> To: [e-mail] WG
>>>>>>> Subject: [OAUTH-WG] IPR on OAuth bearer
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> an IPR disclosure had been submitted for the OAuth bearer document
>>>>>>> recently. In case you may have missed it, here is the link to it:
>>>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1752/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The ADs will re-run the IETF last call due to this new IPR filing
>>>>>>> and we would also like the working group to check the IPR and to
>>>>>>> think about potential implications.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ciao
>>>>>>> Hannes&   Derek
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> OAuth mailing list
>>>>>>> [e-mail]
>>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> OAuth mailing list
>>>> [e-mail]
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
>