Subject: comments on draft-ietf-ipr-submission-rights-06.txt

From: Thomas Narten <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 13:30:30 -0400

Substantative (maybe):

>    b. "IETF Standards Process": the activities undertaken by the IETF in
>       any of the settings described in 1(c) below.

>    c. "IETF Contribution": any submission to the IETF intended by the
>       Contributor for publication as an Internet-Draft or RFC (except
>       for RFC Editor Contributions described below) and any statement
>       made within the context of an IETF Standards Process. Such

somewhat circular definition, since b. points to c. and (c) refers to
"context of standards process"

Would it help to replace "IETF Standards Process" in c. with "IETF
activity"? (note "activity" is used later in the same definition.)

>    Drafts not intended to become part of the Standards Process, the
>    following are required in all such drafts to protect the IETF and its
>    processes.  The RFC Editor may require additional notices.
> 
>    a. An IPR Disclosure Acknowledgement, identical to that specified in
>       Section 5.1.

I gather from this that IPR disclosures for RFC contributions are the
same as for IETF contribution. Correct?

But the above text is implied only because an RFC Editor Document must
first be an ID. Once the ID is an RFC, is there any obligation to
disclose or update IPR?

>    n. "IPR" or "Intellectual Property Rights": means patent, copyright,
>       utility, model, invention registration, database and data rights
>       that may Cover an Implementing Technology, whether such rights
>       arise from a registration or renewal thereof, or an application
>       therefore, in each case anywhere in the world.

It might be good to more clearly define the term "implementor", as the
term is used in ipr-template and I'm not sure *exactly* what it
means. I.e., isn't the disributer of software (who may not be the
implementor) also subject to IPR issues? ipr-template doesn't could be
read to say the IPR issues only apply to the implementor.

Nits:

TOC is broken (all refernces point to page 1)

> 1. Definitions

I assume these are suppsoed to be _identical_ to those in the
draft-ietf-ipr-technology-rights-10.txt? Hmm. they aren't quite. Note:
Definition m. has more text in one than the other, and n., o., and
p. are absent in ipr-technology.

Would be good to have the definitions be word-for-word identical.

>    a. To the extent that an Contribution or any portion thereof is
>       protected by copyright and other rights of authorship, the
>       Contributor, and each named co-contributor, and the organization
>       he or she represents or is sponsored by (if any) grant a
>       perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive, royalty-free, world-wide
>       right and license to the ISOC and the IETF under all intellectual
>       property rights in the Contribution.

s/Contribution./Contribution:/

>    The following are the rights the IETF requires in all IETF
>    Contributions:.

s/://

>    submitted as an Contribution or otherwise considered in any part of

s/an Contribution/a Contribution/ (same fix needs to be applied more
than once in text)

>    The following are the rights the IETF, as the publisher of Internet-
>    Drafts, requires in all RDC Editor Contributions:

s/RDC/RFC/

>       (B) unless explicitly disallowed in the notices contained in an
>          Contribution (as per Section 5.4 below), to prepare derivative
>          works (other than translations) that are based on or
>          incorporate all or part of the Contribution, or comment upon it

comma after "it", to separate from the immediately following point?

>    liabilities connected with these documents.  The copyright notice
>    also alerts readers that the document is an IETF Document, and that
>    ISOC claims copyright rights in certain aspects of the document, such

s/in certain/to certain/

> 6. Notices and Rights Required in RFC Editor Contributions
> 
>    Since the IETF acts as publisher of Internet Drafts, even Internet

s/even/even for/ (otherwise it's somewhat hard to parse)

Thomas

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