Subject: Re: IPR and JPEG

From: Bob Hinden <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2002 09:52:56 -0700

Keith,

The part of this that I think is relevant to the IETF was:

>AJuly 19  JPEG committee thinks there is prior art...sets up web site to
>collect data
>
>http://www.jpeg.org/newsrel1.htm

It would appear that the jpeg group decided there was prior art and started 
a public process to collect and publish examples.  That is something the 
IETF could do when dealing with IPR claims made against IETF developed 
protocols.

The IETF currently only publishes IPR claims without any judgement of their 
validity.  We could also start publishing links to documents that people 
think are examples of prior art.  This would be IMHO a useful service for 
the community.

Bob

At 04:03 PM 7/25/2002, Keith Moore wrote:
> > >July 11  Forgent networks claims  essential IPR in JPEG standard
> >
> > JPEG is not an Internet protocol at all, let alone it not being an
> > IETF standard. What does this have to do with this group?
>
>perhaps more to the point, I'm not aware that any internet standards-track
>documents depend on JPEG for implementation.  the fax people use a variant
>of TIFF (which has had its ipr problems, but they're not new news)
>
>there is a MIME type for JPEG in a standards-track document, and we should
>remove that definition when the document is advanced (like we did with GIF)
>but we wouldn't deprecate the image/jpeg content-type just like we
>didn't deprecate image/gif.
>
>Keith

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