Subject: not everyone has a legal advisor

From: "Scott W Brim" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 15:33:52 -0400

Several people have brought up an issue ... We are now telling working group
participants that yes, they should think about IPR when evaluating
technology.  They have for years, but now we're saying so explicitly.
However, one of the good things about the IETF is that you don't have to
have a lot of financial backing to participate, so we get startups and
consultants and simply concerned people.  A non-negligible portion of IETF
participants can't get the kind of legal advice they should in order to deal
with some of the questions that have come up in WGs.  In the past, the usual
process was that those with the resources would get opinions and pass them
on (usually out of band) to those without them, and a consensus would
coalesce.  It's fine with me if we stick with that.  If so, do we document
it explicitly?  If not, do you have any good ideas on engineering a better
process?

swb

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

---

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 10:16:34 +0300 (EEST)

> it explicitly?  If not, do you have any good ideas on engineering a better

If you don't have legal advice, decide against any IPR (by default).

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "Tell me of difficulties surmounted,
Netcore Oy                   not those you stumble over and fall"
Systems. Networks. Security.  -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords

---

From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 09:45:41 +0200

--On fredag, oktober 25, 2002 10:16:34 +0300 Pekka Savola 
<[email-masked]> wrote:

> In the past, the usual
>> process was that those with the resources would get opinions and pass
>> them on (usually out of band) to those without them, and a consensus
>> would coalesce.  It's fine with me if we stick with that.  If so, do we
>> document it explicitly?  If not, do you have any good ideas on
>> engineering a better process?
>

Denial of service attack: claim IPR on solutions you don't like.

as with solutions for issues of complexity, scaling or security, I think we 
have to do the best we can, even when we don't know what we are doing.

                   Harald