Re: [tsvwg] IPR Declarations on draft-ietf-tsvwg-aqm-dualq-coupled

[Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <[e-mail]>]

Hi Koen

> To this end and recognising its importance, Nokia wishes to inform you
> that Alcatel Lucent has submitted changes to the IPR Statements made
> in 2015 and 2017, as regards the two patent families it still
> owns/controls, to provide assurance that we will not assert our
> patents against users of our patented DualQ technology who fully
> implement draft-ietf-tsvwg-aqm-dualq-coupled. As regards the remaining
> patent family no longer owned/controlled by Nokia or Alcatel Lucent,
> we understand that this is directed to an optional and not recommended
> part of the IETF draft.
>
> We hope that this gesture and change of IPR Statements will help
> alleviate any concerns regarding our previous Statements and the use
> of the ECT(1) codepoint header in the Internet Protocol to enable L4S.

I was delighted to hear this. However, looking at the new disclosures,
they do not alleviate the concerns. Quoting from
https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/3562/ :

> "Reciprocity" includes retaining the right to assert the Disclosed
> Patents against any entity, and its Affiliates, that asserts any
> patent(s) that it owns or controls (directly or indirectly) either
> against the Covenantor, or any of its Affiliates or any successor in
> title to them, or against any products, or portions thereof, of the
> Covenantor, its Affiliates or supplied by the Covenantor, or its
> Affiliates, to their customers either alone or in combination with
> other products.

This termination clause is a non-starter. This clause is triggered by
*any* assertion of *any* patent against the patent holder. This means
that if dualq becomes an internet standard that is incorporated into
vital infrastructure, this will in practice prevent others from
defending themselves against any patent assertions made by the patent
holder, unless they wish to be subject to additional litigation over the
patent covered by the IPR statement. Which is a level of leverage I
don't think the IETF should be helping *anyone* obtain.

-Toke