Subject: -technology - define IPR

From: Scott Bradner <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 00:07:42 -0400 (EDT)

thomas asks:
> >    n. "IPR" or "Intellectual Property Rights": means patent, copyright,
> >       utility, model, invention registration, database and data rights
> >       that may Cover an Implementing Technology, whether such rights
> >       arise from a registration or renewal thereof, or an application
> >       therefore, in each case anywhere in the world.
> 
> Not really sure what this text means, especially the "database and
> data rights" stuff. Where does this come from?

it comes from Jorge (the lawyer)

Scott

_______________________________________________
Ipr-wg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg

---

From: "Contreras, Jorge" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2003 10:15:51 -0400

Scott

JLC> This list includes patents and some non-patent IPR that is also
registered, mostly outside the U.S.  (Typo: there is no comma between
"utility" and "model"; a "utility model" is a form of sub-patent
protection offered in some European countries like Germany.)

I'd group these as follows:

1.  patents, utility models and invention registrations: all are patent-like.
Though there's really no "protection" associated with an invention 
registration, the filing is made with the US PTO, so it seemed logical
to include it (I believe someone on this list suggested it some time ago).

2.  copyright: this one is tricky.  Clearly, copyrights in IETF Contributions, 
the documents themselves, are covered in the Rights in Contributions
document.  There's no intention to cover those copyrights here.
In this document, this item is intended to cover copyright that Contributors
may claim in the technical implementations of standards themselves (including
architectural and structural code elements).  Such IPR could, in the right
circumstances, be just as inhibiting to implementers as patents.

3.  data and database rights:   in Europe there are distinct legal rights 
that attach to data and databases.  I'm not sure how applicable these
rights would be to the typical IETF Contribution, and suspect that they
would seldom be relevant (as it is unlikely that someone will contribute
a database to an IETF standards activity).  However, in order to be
comprehensive, it seemed reasonable to include these rights in the list,
as omitting them might have given an unscrupulous participant an
unintended way to make trouble.  I couldn't see any down side to including
them, but am willing to be persuaded.

4.  You should also be aware that this list was once longer 
(i.e., listing other rights, including trade secrets).  However, after
a detailed discussion in San Francisco, a group of us arrived at the current
list.

Jorge