Simple. By having WG members simply state whether they will or will not adopt the proposed standard given the IPR issues. Trying to discuss the merits of the IPR disclosure is impossible.
EH > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Thomas [mailto:m...@mtcc.com] > Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 12:34 PM > To: Eran Hammer > Cc: Hannes Tschofenig; oauth@ietf.org WG > Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] IPR on OAuth bearer > > 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. > > Mike > > > > > EH > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Michael Thomas [mailto:m...@mtcc.com] > >> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 12:15 PM > >> To: Eran Hammer > >> Cc: Hannes Tschofenig; oauth@ietf.org 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:hannes.tschofe...@gmx.net] > >>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 11:37 AM > >>>> To: Eran Hammer > >>>> Cc: Hannes Tschofenig; oauth@ietf.org 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: oauth-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-boun...@ietf.org] On > >>>>>> Behalf Of Hannes Tschofenig > >>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 10:44 AM > >>>>>> To: oauth@ietf.org 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 > >>>>>> OAuth@ietf.org > >>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> OAuth mailing list > >>> OAuth@ietf.org > >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth _______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list OAuth@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
