What has happened in this case is very clear. I believe that Sam is
handling the situation properly.
Russ
At 11:18 AM 4/7/2007, todd glassey wrote:
Russ - does the current policy of the IETF's IPR disclosure process
include what happens to a filing when the IPR disclosure is NOT
FILED in a timely manner? Or the party here that was supposed to
file the IPR Disclosure doesn't for whatever reason?
These are real issues and effect the rights going forward so they
are important.
Also how is the IETF going to address postings to it that in those
instances, the IPR disclosures are refused???
Todd Glassey
----- Original Message ----- From: "Russ Housley"
<housley(_at_)vigilsec(_dot_)com>
To: "Dean Anderson" <dean(_at_)av8(_dot_)com>
Cc: "Mark Brown" <mark(_at_)redphonesecurity(_dot_)com>;
<ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Sent: Friday, April 06, 2007 2:37 PM
Subject: RE: Withdrawal of Approval and Second Last Call:
draft-housley-tls-authz-extns
Dean:
I'm still not clear on a few things:
-- When did Russ Housley learn of the Patent Filing?
I was aware that Mark Brown was working on a patent; however, I did
not begin working with him until after his provisional patent
application was filed. I did not see the claims until the filing
became public.
Since I knew that a patent was in the works, but I did not know the
details, at the time we submitted the -00 draft to the repository
(which was February 2006), I reminded Mark Brown that an IPR
statement might be necessary.
Russ
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf