Question for the IETF... How are people supposed to verify the IETF's assumptions?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Since Harald has already threatened me with suspension for offtopic postings in regard to these matters in the IPR-WG, the only other place I can post this is to the IETF at IETF dot ORG list...

---

Question... The question simply is that IETF's "IP Reliance Processes" clearly state "that it is the responsibility of the relying party to verify the IPR issues pertaining to any use of an IETF-IP or 'Work Product' from any IETF Vetting Effort". That also clearly includes any and all participation in the IETF itself including that of the WG and Meeting under the Note-Well IP conveyance rules as part of that "Work Product"... So let me ask - how is that supposed to happen? How is diligence supposed to happen here?

This is a VERY important question since the current language makes it the responsibility of the relying parties to also protect themselves from any and all liabilities with regard to participating in the IETF and without a formal release from all the other parties in a WG there seems to be an issue here.

Any thoughts (other than trying to stop me from asking these types of questions?)

Todd Glassey


_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]