On Tue, 28 Jan 2014, Dale R. Worley wrote:
From: "Mulligan, Geoff" <geoff(_dot_)mulligan(_at_)nist(_dot_)gov>
So because I know of IPR that someone else has and is not disclosing
and because I cannot legally disclose it - I can't continue to
participate in the discussion doesn't seem right. I'm not the
holder of the IPR that isn't being disclosed, but I'm penalized.
That is the rule (it seems). It's hard on you, but the IETF seems to
hold to the principle "You can't participate if you know of
undisclosed IPR claims", presumably so the participant can't secretly
steer the solution to include or exclude the IPR. It's a choice of
who gets inconvenienced, you or the IETF?
Indeed, if the IETF didn't have this rule, a company with undisclosed
IPR could hire consultants, put them under NDA, and have them advocate
at the IETF to include the IPR in standards.
Um ... if you are currently working for the IPR owner as a consultant,
it isn't 3rd party IPR ... if one is being paid to advocate related
to IPR, it is not the case Geoff outlined.