On 2009-11-24 06:44, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 08:16:49 -0500
Scott Brim <scott(_dot_)brim(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
Simon Josefsson allegedly wrote on 11/23/2009 5:03 AM:
John-Luc said he is bound by confidentiality obligations from his
company, and I think the same applies to most employees of larger
organizations. There is nothing explicit in BCP 79 to protect
against this apparent conflict of interest, or is there?
Since disclosure is required
for anyone submitting documents or participating in IETF
discussions, a person who does not disclose IPR for this reason, or
any other reason, must not contribute to or participate in IETF
activities with respect to technologies that he or she reasonably and
personally knows to be Covered by IPR which he or she will not
Precisely. The conflict Simon mentions was of course known to most of
the WG; that's one reason we have that clause.
IMHO, BCP79 creates no particular problem for corporate lawyers who
are instructed by their corporate management to ensure that the company
behaves as a good citizen in its standards activities. This is strongly
in the company's interests, anyway, since failure to disclose when
required by a standards process threatens the validity of the patent.
It really is not the IETF's problem. It is a problem for a company that
chooses not to behave as a good citizen.
Ietf mailing list