Hi,

I have no objection to this new version of the statements.

Be goode,

--
"Esta vez no fallaremos, Doctor Infierno"

Dr Diego R. Lopez
Telefonica I+D
https://www.linkedin.com/in/dr2lopez/

e-mail: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Tel:         +34 913 129 041
Mobile:  +34 682 051 091
----------------------------------

On 27/06/2019, 19:51, "I2nsf on behalf of Yoav Nir" 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> on behalf of 
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Hi folks.

As you may have noticed, after some back-and-forth with the authors and their 
university, the IPR statements have been modified as follows:

OLD:
Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory License to All Implementers with Possible 
Royalty/Fee

NEW:
If this standard is adopted, Sungkyunkwan University (SKKU) will not assert any 
patents owned or controlled by SKKU against any party for making, using, 
selling, importing or offering for sale a product that implements the standard, 
provided, however that SKKU retains the right to assert its patents (including 
the right to claim past royalties) against any party that asserts a patent it 
owns or controls (either directly or indirectly) against SKKU or any of SKKU's 
affiliates or successors in title or against any products of SKKU or any 
products of any of SKKU's affiliates either alone or in combination with other 
products; and SKKU retains the right to assert its patents against any product 
or portion thereof that is not necessary for compliance with the standard. 
Royalty-bearing licenses will be available to anyone who prefers that option.


The new version is similar to the licensing terms in many IPR statements issued 
by other rights holders.  See for example https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/3591/

It is still up to the working group to decide if this is acceptable, and group 
members, especially those who raised objections previously, are encouraged to 
chime in.

We will raise this issue one more time at the meeting, just to make sure 
everyone has been heard from.

Thanks,

Linda & Yoav



On 6 Jun 2019, at 20:27, Yoav Nir 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Hi

Yesterday we got 5 IPR statements ([1], [2], [3], [4], [5]) related to the 
following drafts respectively:
·
·         draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-dm
·         draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-monitoring-data-model
·         draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model
·         draft-ietf-i2nsf-registration-interface-dm
·         draft-ietf-i2nsf-consumer-facing-interface-dm

All of these are WG documents, and one of them (the capability data model 
draft) is in WGLC.  See [6] and RFC 8179 for more information about IPR 
disclosures.

All the disclosures claim that the patents or patent applications mentioned may 
be necessary for implementation of the drafts. Neither the chairs nor anyone 
else in the IETF is considered competent to evaluate such claims or the 
validity of any patents, so I suggest that in this thread we avoid bringing 
this up. What may be concerning is that the licensing policy for these 
disclosures is "Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory License to All Implementers 
with Possible Royalty/Fee”, which makes such technologies problematic to many 
implementers, especially non-commercial ones.

To quote from section 7 of RFC 8179:

   In general, IETF working groups prefer technologies with no known IPR

   claims or, for technologies with claims against them, an offer of

   royalty-free licensing.  However, to solve a given technical problem,

   IETF working groups have the discretion to adopt a technology as to

   which IPR claims have been made if they feel that this technology is

   superior enough to alternatives with fewer IPR claims or free

   licensing to outweigh the potential cost of the licenses.


So this message is to start a discussion about how the I2NSF working group 
would like to handle this disclosure. Continuing as before and moving to 
publication is the default outcome of this discussion, but the WG is required 
to evaluate its position about these disclosures. This is what this thread is 
for.

Thanks,


Linda & Yoav

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/3553/
[2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/3557/
[3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/3556/
[4] https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/3555/
[5] https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/3554/
[6] https://www.ietf.org/standards/ipr/


________________________________

Este mensaje y sus adjuntos se dirigen exclusivamente a su destinatario, puede 
contener información privilegiada o confidencial y es para uso exclusivo de la 
persona o entidad de destino. Si no es usted. el destinatario indicado, queda 
notificado de que la lectura, utilización, divulgación y/o copia sin 
autorización puede estar prohibida en virtud de la legislación vigente. Si ha 
recibido este mensaje por error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente 
por esta misma vía y proceda a su destrucción.

The information contained in this transmission is privileged and confidential 
information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. 
If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby 
notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication 
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, do not 
read it. Please immediately reply to the sender that you have received this 
communication in error and then delete it.

Esta mensagem e seus anexos se dirigem exclusivamente ao seu destinatário, pode 
conter informação privilegiada ou confidencial e é para uso exclusivo da pessoa 
ou entidade de destino. Se não é vossa senhoria o destinatário indicado, fica 
notificado de que a leitura, utilização, divulgação e/ou cópia sem autorização 
pode estar proibida em virtude da legislação vigente. Se recebeu esta mensagem 
por erro, rogamos-lhe que nos o comunique imediatamente por esta mesma via e 
proceda a sua destruição
_______________________________________________
I2nsf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf

Reply via email to