Subject: [clue] Fwd: IPR Disclosure: Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-clue-framework-14

From: Mary Barnes <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 10:47:38 -0500

Per RFC 6701, given this IPR declaration, folks should consider whether the
WG should continue with this document or whether some alternatives ought to
be considered.  Note, there are other IPR declarations against this
document and other CLUE WG documents. You can find those identified in the
tracker and follow the links to the declarations:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/clue/
You click on the document name and then the second field at the bottom of
the document description summary shows the number of IPRs.  Clicking on
that link takes you to the list of IPR declarations.

Regards,
Mary
As WG co-chair

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: IETF Secretariat <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 2:38 PM
Subject: IPR Disclosure: Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd's Statement about IPR
related to draft-ietf-clue-framework-14
To: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked],
[email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]

Dear Andrew Pepperell, Mark Duckworth, Stephan Wenger:

 An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled "Framework
for
Telepresence Multi-Streams" (draft-ietf-clue-framework) was submitted to the
IETF Secretariat on 2014-04-28 and has been posted on the "IETF Page of
Intellectual Property Rights Disclosures"
(https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2347/). The title of the IPR disclosure is
"Huawei Technologies Co.,Ltd's Statement about IPR related to
draft-ietf-clue-
framework-14."");

The IETF Secretariat

---

From: Stephen Botzko <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 2 May 2014 10:17:48 -0400

Since in this particular case, the declaration includes an unpublished
application, a full technical assessment is not possible.  So finding
alternatives seems problematic.

I propose that we continue working on this draft, at least for now, and
re-assess this later on - when perhaps the application is published or
issues.

Stephen

On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 11:47 AM, Mary Barnes <[email-masked]>wrote:

> Per RFC 6701, given this IPR declaration, folks should consider whether
> the WG should continue with this document or whether some alternatives
> ought to be considered.  Note, there are other IPR declarations against
> this document and other CLUE WG documents. You can find those identified in
> the tracker and follow the links to the declarations:
> Subject: IPR Disclosure: Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd's Statement about
> IPR related to draft-ietf-clue-framework-14
>  An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled
> "Framework for
> _______________________________________________
> clue mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/clue
>
>

---

From: Mary Barnes <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 2 May 2014 11:56:35 -0500

Certainly, that seems sensible.  One question of curiosity is whether this
IPR also applies to any of the solution documents?  I don't see any
declarations from Huawei against either the Signaling or CLUE Protocol.

Another question is given the IPR that's piling up against these documents,
will there be anyone other than the folks with IPR that would be willing to
implement the work that CLUE is producing?  For example, the Open Source
community.

Regards,
Mary.