Subject: [MMUSIC] IPR statement on draft-ietf-mmusic-ice-15.txt

From: Colin Perkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 13:32:39 +0100

The secretariat informs us that updated IPR disclosures have been  
submitted pertaining to ICE (These were submitted on 13th April -  
apologies for the delayed notification):

https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/ipr_detail_show.cgi?ipr_id=838
https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/ipr_detail_show.cgi?ipr_id=839
https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/ipr_detail_show.cgi?ipr_id=840

Colin (as chair)

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

---

From: Peter Saint-Andre <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 11:17:38 -0600

> https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/ipr_detail_show.cgi?ipr_id=840

What is the appropriate venue to discuss these disclosures? Seeing none, 
I reply on the MMUSIC list.

The patent holder states that it shall grant licenses "on reasonable 
terms and conditions", but the terms and conditions are not defined. 
Therefore this is merely a promissory note. A definition of the terms 
and conditions would be helpful.

The following text is an improvement over the original version:

    In addition, the Patent Holder grants a "free" license to any
    prospective licensee if such prospective licensee commits to
    license its own essential patent(s) or essential patent claim(s)
    (if any) for implementation of any IETF specification for "free".

The newly-added words "if any" are particularly helpful, since some 
entities (e.g., open-source projects) do not typically hold patents or 
make patent claims. Will such an entity need to explicitly register with 
or apply to the patent holder in order to obtain a license? What 
penalties will ensue if such an entity does not obtain a license?

The text does not define the procedure by which a prospective licensee 
can become a licensee. Is that procedure still to be defined? Presumably 
the procedure will include a mechanism by which the prospective licensee 
"commits to license its own essential patent(s) or essential patent 
claim(s) (if any) for implementation of any IETF specification for 
'free'". However, in the absence of a defined procedure it is difficult 
to know.

Given the strong and widespread interest in the NAT traversal 
technologies specified in draft-ietf-mmusic-ice, more clarity regarding 
the licensing terms, conditions, and procedures would be appreciated.

Thanks.

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
XMPP Standards Foundation
http://www.xmpp.org/xsf/people/stpeter.shtml

---

From: Colin Perkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 18:40:57 +0100

On 11 May 2007, at 18:17, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> What is the appropriate venue to discuss these disclosures? Seeing  
> none, I reply on the MMUSIC list.

The MMUSIC list is the correct venue, since this is an MMUSIC working  
group draft.

Colin (as chair)

---

From: Mark Baugher <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 12:51:19 -0700

On May 11, 2007, at 10:17 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:

> entities (e.g., open-source projects) do not typically hold patents  
> or make patent claims. Will such an entity need to explicitly  
> register with or apply to the patent holder in order to obtain a  
> license? What penalties will ensue if such an entity does not  
> obtain a license?
>
I'm no lawyer, but I always understood this to mean that if you don't  
sue the patent holder than the patent holder won't sue you.  I always  
understood it to be that simple.

Mark

---

From: Peter Saint-Andre <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 14:18:36 -0600

Mark Baugher wrote:
>> make patent claims. Will such an entity need to explicitly register 
>> with or apply to the patent holder in order to obtain a license? What 

IANAL too. Your interpretation has common sense on its side, but common 
sense is not legally binding. To my suspicious mind, the phrase "X 
grants License A if Y commits to do B" might be construed to imply "X 
will grant License A only after Y has completed a legal agreement in 
which it promises to do B".

Peter