At 04:59 13-08-2008, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
On the other hand (trying to play devil's advocate), if the promise
was made by someone in the organization that did not have authority
to commit the organization to that statement, I could see why the
responsible persons for that organization would want the original
statement made invisible, so as to not have to eternally go around
and explain the situation.....
If the "IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
intellectual property rights or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
any IETF documents or the extent to which any license under such
rights might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it
has made any independent effort to identify any such rights", then
why should it try to assess whether someone in the organization has
the authority to commit the organization to that?
Section 7 of RFC 3979 covers individuals who are not permitted by
their employers or by other factors to make a disclosure.
There is already a note about marking IPR disclosures as
"non-compliant" if they do not comply with the formal
requirements. This could be extended to explain the situation where
the person was not authorized to make the original statement.
At 05:21 13-08-2008, Simon Josefsson wrote:
One way to mitigate your problem without getting into evaluating
correctness or removing disclosures would be to collect all patent
disclosures updates on the same page as the original patent disclosure,
and sort the entries in reverse calendar order. Then anyone can add
note that a disclosure below was filed without authority. That
disclosure can be evaluated for correctness the same way that other
disclosures can be evaluated. Removing disclosures makes it impossible
for IETF participants to evaluate the contents for themselves.
If anyone can add a note afterwards, it may lead to "abuse". Keeping
a historical record is useful for evaluation. Allowing removal of
disclosures is not a good idea. That doesn't mean that there should
be a hard rule which forbids it.
Ietf mailing list