Yes. -- Eric Gray Principal Engineer Ericsson > -----Original Message----- > From: John C Klensin [mailto:john-ietf@xxxxxxx] > Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2008 12:00 PM > To: Eric Gray; Simon Josefsson; Andrew Sullivan > Cc: ietf@xxxxxxxx > Subject: RE: Removal of IETF patent disclosures? > Importance: High > > > > --On Thursday, August 14, 2008 10:30 AM -0500 Eric Gray > <eric.gray@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > John, > > > > What you said is all true, but obviously it has nothing > > to do with what you responded to. I said (in effect) that - > > if one set of lawyers contact another set of lawyers, we may > > have to take some action and we should have the mechanisms in > > place to allow that. > > We don't want to encourage anyone who decides that an IPR claim > or rights/licensing summary is inappropriate and should be taken > down to go looking for an IETF lawyer, do we? The denial of > service --or the accumulation of costs (in some form) to the > IETF -- occurs the moment that call or letter is received. I > don't think we want to design mechanisms that make that easy for > the person requesting the removal. The "wait for a court order > or equivalent" suggestion was an attempt to raise the bar and > make sure that the entity requesting the removal was both real > and very serious (just finding someone claiming to be a lawyer > to make a call does not require either). > > And that was my point, which seems exactly in line with your > comment. > > john > > > _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf