Wijnen, Bert (Bert) <bwijnen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > To: Margaret Wasserman <margaret@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, >> At 12:16 PM +0100 2/1/05, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote: >>> <t> >>> The IASA is responsible for managing all intellectual >>> property rights (IPR), including but not limited to >>> trademarks, and copyrights, that belong to the IETF. I must admit to thinking we were moving away from all-inclusive language here. As I read this, we'd be _asking_ the IASA to constantly increase the scope of this responsibility as folks allege that new areas should be considered "Intellectual Property Rights". >> Is this really what we want to say? > > I believe so. The above is theadditional responsibility for IASA. I'm afraid I don't understand this reply. >> Or do we want to say something like: >> >> The IASA is responsible for managing all intellectual property rights >> (IPR) related to IETF administrative support, including but not >> limited to trademarks, copyrights, attendance lists, tools, etc.? >> >> We have an IPR WG and have undertaken a mammoth effort to define our >> standards-related IPR and how that will be assigned and managed, and >> I am not sure that we want to hand management of that IPR over to the >> IASA/IAOC, do we? Given the number of the people in the community >> that were involved/interested in that effort, I think that we may >> continue to want direct community control over the standards-related >> IPR. Clearly there are some things we _do_ want to hand over to IASA; but a blanket redirection of everything the IPR WG (and others) have been working on _to_ the IASA seems out of line with what has been discussed. P.S: I'm prepared to live with whatever Jorge recommends; but I'd really prefer to avoid open-ended reassignments. -- John Leslie <john@xxxxxxx> _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf