--On Thursday, September 19, 2013 07:57 +1200 Brian E Carpenter
<brian(_dot_)e(_dot_)carpenter(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
On 17/09/2013 05:34, Alan Clark wrote:
...
It should be noted that the duty to disclose IPR is NOT ONLY
for the authors of a draft, and the IETF "reminder" system
seems to be focused solely on authors. The duty to disclose
IPR lies with any individual or company that participates in
the IETF not just authors.
Companies don't participate in the IETF; the duty of
disclosure is specifically placed on individual contributors
and applies to patents "reasonably and personally known" to
them.
IANAL but I did read the BCP.
Brian,
That isn't how I interpreted Alan's point. My version would be
that, if the shepherd template writeup says "make sure that the
authors are up-to-date" (or anything equivalent) it should also
say "ask/remind the WG participants too". IMO, that is a
perfectly reasonable and orderly suggestion (and no lawyer is
required to figure it out). One inference from Glen's point
that authors have already certified that they have provided
anything they need to provide by the time an I-D is posted with
the "full compliance" language is that it may actually be more
important to remind general participants in the WG than to ask
the authors.
john