ietf-asrg
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [Asrg] US Spam patents: Partial list

2003-06-13 01:07:48
I think your suggestion is a very good and balanced one. And I'm going
to fully disclose our IPR.

Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: Yakov Shafranovich [mailto:research(_at_)solidmatrix(_dot_)com] 
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 9:01 AM
To: Peter Kay; Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: RE: [Asrg] US Spam patents: Partial list


At 06:32 AM 6/12/2003 -1000, Peter Kay wrote:

IMHO: as an a holder of a anti-spam patent pending, I think 
its best to 
let IPR holders approach us. Otherwise you put yourself in the 
unenviable position of "authority" on patents. If you just 
say "these 
are the IPR claims that have been submitted to us" that 
makes it clean 
and simple, not to mention easy to maintain.

In some cases this would not be true. Take MailBlocks, for 
example - they 
are claiming patents on all C/R systems. They have not 
approached, and 
since their IP is of very general nature, thus we must 
approach them to 
solicit a submission of IPR claims which is what I have done. 
Otherwise, we 
might be working on a standard only to find out that it is 
patented. As for 
the patents that are covering every nook and cranny of 
anti-spam, I am 
agreeing with you. It would be an impossible task to catalog 
all patents in 
the world.

Therefore, I am suggesting that we should have the following 
policy: 1. Solicit input from IP holders on very broad 
business methods patents 
such as the MailBlocks patents.
2. Request that all members of the group that have IP, submit 
information 
about it.
3. Accept submissions from IPR claimants that are not part of 
the group as 
they send them.

P.S. BTW, Peter, it would probably be prudent that you let us 
know some 
details on your IP. Feel free to use the template 
(http://www.solidmatrix.com/research/asrg/asrg-ipr.html).

Yakov






_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg