It is not so simple. BTW, this is not legal opinion, rather experience
The phrase "reasonable expectation" is fraught with difficulty both about
whether a contribute knew about IP or did not know or should reasonably have
known and whether he/she believed any such IP would be "reasonably
expected" to be essential
But my objective in the question what might be "late" was whether IETF may
have defined "late" somewhere and the rationale for a new "note well"
statement that it was because of recent "late disclosures"
I caution against discouraging disclosures even it they are "late"
George T. Willingmyre, P.E.
President, GTW Associates
Spencerville, MD USA 20868
301.421.4138
www.gtwassociates.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Randy Bush" <randy(_at_)psg(_dot_)com>
To: "George Willingmyre" <gtw(_at_)gtwassociates(_dot_)com>
Cc: "IETF Disgust" <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 7:30 PM
Subject: Re: IESG Considering a Revision to NOTE WELL
let's be simple here. 'late' would seem to be any time after there was
a reasonable expectation that you knew there was a document on which
there was ipr.
randy