Subject: RE: consensus call on pra/mailfrom deployment and versioning/scope

From: "Harry Katz" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 09:10:31 -0700

On Thursday, September 09, 2004 12:30 PM John Glube wrote:

[snip]
> I presume a proposal which includes both pra and mailfrom 
> checks would involve elements of draft-marid-pra and 
> draft-marid-core, so giving rise to Microsoft's IPR claim and 
> the draft patent license with the noted restriction.

Microsoft's IPR disclosure clearly states that our IPR claims relate to
the maird-core and marid-pra specs used in combination.  We are not
aware of any IPR claims on marid-core used in combination with some
other specification.  

> As such, the restriction contained in the draft patent 
> Sender-ID license would preclude network administrators from 
> incorporating both mailfrom and pra checks without obtaining 
> separate permission from Microsoft.

Not true.  Administrators or any other end users of licensed Sender ID
implementations do not require a license from Microsoft.  This is
clearly stated in section 2.2 of the Sender ID license.

---

From: Andrew Newton <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 12:23:09 -0400

> clearly stated in section 2.2 of the Sender ID license.

Perhaps I misinterpreted the main question of John's email.  I thought 
he was asking if the license allows for an implementation of both PRA 
and MAIL FROM.  In other words, he was asking a question about certain 
language in the license that could be interpreted as disallowing any 
other scope.  And I think the question arises from what is being 
considered the "Sender ID Specification".

-andy

---

From: Mark <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:27:08 GMT

> clearly stated in section 2.2 of the Sender ID license.

IANAL, but when you say, "Administrators ... of LICENSEd Sender ID 
implementations do not require a LICENSE," then does not the former preclude 
the latter?

Or are you saying I, as Administrator, do not need a license when I use an 
already exsting, licensed Sender-ID product (licensed to the company, for 
instance), but DO require one if I use PRA checks in a program of my own?

Regards,

- Mark

---

From: "John Glube" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:03:25 -0400

Harry,

I appreciate the point that:

>Microsoft's IPR disclosure clearly states that our IPR
>claims relate to the maird-core and marid-pra specs used in
>combination.  We are not aware of any IPR claims on
>marid-core used in combination with some other
>specification.  

I acknowledge that:

>... Administrators or any other end users of licensed
>Sender ID implementations do not require a license from
>Microsoft.  This is clearly stated in section 2.2 of the
>Sender ID license.

Perhaps I did not make my point clearly in my earlier note. 

So, let me give a specific example.

Let's say I am a software developer. 

A protocol is adopted which allows MTA's to do mailfrom
and/or pra checks. The specification includes
draft-marid-core (modified to include reference to mailfrom
checks as well as pra checks), draft-marid-pra and
draft-marid-mailfrom.

(This is somewhat speculative on my part, but
we need a set of facts for the sake of discussion.)

Microsoft has an IPR claim on using draft-marid-pra in
combination with draft-marid-core.

(I make this statement based on Microsoft's existing
claims.)

I want to write a program which allows an MTA to run
mailfrom and/or pra checks using these specifications and
then distribute this program to end users.

The program will be a plug in, or filter which is designed
to work with any of the existing MTA's on the market.

The draft patent license contains the following:

Microsoft ... hereby grant You a perpetual ...worldwide
license under Microsoft’s Necessary Claims to use ...
object code versions of Licensed Implementations only as
incorporated into Licensed Products and solely for the
purpose of conforming with the Sender ID Specification.

(See section 2.1 of the draft Patent License.)

I appreciate that as long as I include the requisite notice:

You also have ... a ... license to distribute or otherwise
disclose source code copies of such Licensed Implementation
...

(See section 2.2 of the draft Patent License.)

The question is whether I can incorporate mailfrom checks
in my program, so that an end user can do both mailfrom
and/or pra checks using my software program?

My concern is with the last restriction in the draft patent
license which reads:

... "and solely for the purpose of conforming with the
Sender ID Specification." 

I take this to mean "object code versions of Licensed
Implementations only as incorporated into Licensed
Products" can only be used to "conform with the Sender ID
Specification."

(The Sender ID Specification being defined as the
combination of draft-marid-pra with draft-marid-core.)

On this point, please also note the following Q & A from
Microsoft's FAQ:

Q8: What if I want to use the Sender ID technology in some
other context, still related to email but perhaps not
related to Sender ID? Will Microsoft sue me? 

A8: Microsoft is committed to working with companies in a
collaborative way to license our Intellectual Property (see
http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/ip/). If Microsoft is
granted patent rights that cover the Sender ID
specification (currently pending) it will make those rights
available at no cost for anyone to implement and use the
Sender ID specification. Microsoft will need to see what
patent rights are granted by the US Patent and Trademark
Office to even know for sure what rights it has to offer.
Since it is impossible to contemplate every possible use of
it Sender ID patent rights we cannot make a commitment up
front to specific license terms. We invite anyone
interested in using Microsoft’s IP to innovate and compete
in the marketplace to come talk to us. 

I want to use the Sender ID technology in a software
program which allows network administrators to run both
mailfrom and/or pra checks on incoming email to the
network, or outgoing email from the network she is
administrating.

Can I do this under the license terms, or do I as per Q8
and A8 need a separate license from Microsoft?

If I need a separate license then as I note in my earlier
email:

As such, the restriction contained in the draft patent
Sender-ID license would preclude network administrators
from incorporating both mailfrom and pra checks without
obtaining separate permission from Microsoft.

To be totally clear, the concern should have read:

As such, the restriction contained in the draft patent
Sender-ID license would preclude network administrators
from incorporating both mailfrom and pra checks without the
distributor of any such Licensed Implementation obtaining
separate permission from Microsoft.

I trust this helps to clarify the issue raised in my
earlier note.

John

John Glube
Toronto, Canada

The FTC Calls For Sender Authentication
http://www.learnsteps4profit.com/dne.html

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.752 / Virus Database: 503 - Release Date: 03/09/2004

---

From: "John Glube" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:43:28 -0400

Andy,

When you wrote:

>Perhaps I misinterpreted the main question of John's email.
>I thought he was asking if the license allows for an
>implementation of both PRA and MAIL FROM.  In other words,
>he was asking a question about certain language in the
>license that could be interpreted as disallowing any other
>scope.  And I think the question arises from what is being
>considered the "Sender ID Specification."

You have fairly stated my concern. 

My purpose in putting forward an example in response to
Harry's message was to simply illustrate the underlying
issue. I regret causing any inconvenience by responding
directly to Harry via the mailing list. 

John
 
John Glube
Toronto, Canada
 
The FTC Calls For Sender Authentication
http://www.learnsteps4profit.com

---