Subject: RFC 3951 source code usage situation just got murkier

From: "Kevin P. Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2011 10:18:20 -0500

RFC 3951 is the specification of iLBC, and includes the reference 
implementation in C source code. This is distributed by the IETF under 
its normal license terms (BSD-style). However, the creators of the codec 
claimed to have patents that would be infringed by distribution/usage of 
that code (and made appropriate IPR disclosures to the IETF), and they 
offered a free patent non-assert license via the 'ilbcfreeware.org' web 
site. Many people have been taking advantage of this license for years 
now, in order to ensure they could safely use the code from RFC 3951.

After Google's acquisition of GIPS, the situation has changed. There is 
a new implementation of iLBC on the WebRTC site, under a different 
license, with an explicit patent grant. However, that patent grant 
applies *only* to the WebRTC implementation, not the implementation in 
RFC 3951. The previous license mechanism on 'ilbcfreeware.org' has been 
removed and is no longer available.

This leaves the community in the unfortunate situation of having an RFC 
that contains a reference implementation, which has had IPR disclosures 
made against it, but for which no free licensing terms are available 
(even though they were in the past).

-- 
Kevin P. Fleming
Digium, Inc. | Director of Software Technologies
Jabber: [email-masked] | SIP: [email-masked] | Skype: kpfleming
445 Jan Davis Drive NW - Huntsville, AL 35806 - USA
Check us out at www.digium.com & www.asterisk.org

---

From: "George Willingmyre" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 12:20:58 -0400

See 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?option=rfc_search&rfc_search=3951
  for page of  Global IP Sound's Statement About IPR Claimed in 
draft-ietf-avt-ilbc-codec
   https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/319/  and for Global IP Sound AB's 
Patent Statement pertaining to draft-andersen-ilbc-00.txt
  https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/64/

Kevin, are you stating  these assurances are no longer valid?

George T. Willingmyre, P.E.
President, GTW Associates
Spencerville, MD USA 20868
301.421.4138
www.gtwassociates.com

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Kevin P. Fleming" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 11:18 AM
Subject: RFC 3951 source code usage situation just got murkier

> implementation in C source code. This is distributed by the IETF under its 
> normal license terms (BSD-style). However, the creators of the codec 
> After Google's acquisition of GIPS, the situation has changed. There is a 
> new implementation of iLBC on the WebRTC site, under a different license, 
> with an explicit patent grant. However, that patent grant applies *only* 
> to the WebRTC implementation, not the implementation in RFC 3951. The 
> previous license mechanism on 'ilbcfreeware.org' has been removed and is 
> no longer available.
>
> made against it, but for which no free licensing terms are available (even 
> though they were in the past).
>
> -- 
> Kevin P. Fleming
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
>

---

From: "Kevin P. Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2011 11:32:03 -0500

> Kevin, are you stating these assurances are no longer valid?

I am not a lawyer, so I would not make such a claim. What I am saying is 
that the mechanism for obtaining the licenses offered via those 
disclosures, which has been available for many years and used by 
probably thousands of parties, is no longer available. In addition, 
there does not appear to be a replacement mechanism available. There is 
a *similar* license offered via the WebRTC site, but it is very clear 
that it only applies to the WebRTC implementation, not the one in the 
RFC (or any others).

---

From: Harald Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2011 19:28:34 +0200

We're working on an updated IPR statement.
We had it on our list of things that need doing, but until now, it 
didn't seem the most urgent thing in the world.

                  Harald (for once speaking for Google).

On 09/07/11 17:18, Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
> its normal license terms (BSD-style). However, the creators of the 
> codec claimed to have patents that would be infringed by 
> distribution/usage of that code (and made appropriate IPR disclosures 
> to the IETF), and they offered a free patent non-assert license via 
> the 'ilbcfreeware.org' web site. Many people have been taking 
> advantage of this license for years now, in order to ensure they could 
> safely use the code from RFC 3951.
>
> After Google's acquisition of GIPS, the situation has changed. There 
> is a new implementation of iLBC on the WebRTC site, under a different 
> RFC 3951. The previous license mechanism on 'ilbcfreeware.org' has 
> been removed and is no longer available.
>
> This leaves the community in the unfortunate situation of having an 
> RFC that contains a reference implementation, which has had IPR 
> disclosures made against it, but for which no free licensing terms are 
> available (even though they were in the past).
>