Re: [PWE3] Posting of IPR Disclosure related to Cisco's Statement of IPR relating to draft-ietf-pwe3-oam-msg-map-12

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

 



On 4/15/2010 1:57 PM, David Morris wrote:
> 
> 
> On Thu, 15 Apr 2010, todd glassey wrote:
> 
>> Dean - I think the problem is that the individuals in the IETF who
>> represent their sponsors are generally not licensed patent agents or
>> attorneys (although there are a couple of exceptions to this last one)
>> and so its really hard for someone who has no experience in the patent
>> process to make any reliable commentary.
> 
> I think there are two aspects of commentary ... commenting on the legal
> aspects is, as you have noted, of limited value. But commenting on the 
> technical basis of a patent claim is within the realm of expertise of this
> group, just as most of us have no legal standing, only some of us will be
> experts for any any given issue. 

yes...  b ut not as it pertains to whether that patent will issue or
not. The issue is not whether the technology is keen or not but whether
the patent issues and nothing else is germane. The entire rest of your
rant is irrelevant in that light as well.

The novelty of the technology is the only thing that matters...


> We can comment on prior art 

yes and no... we can comment on things we believe may be prior art but
that is for the PTO's Judges and the District Court to address otherwise.

> and we can 
> comment on the question of whether a particular issue represents a 
> solution that experienced practitioners in a particular technology would
> come up with as an obvious solution. 

Sure but again - we cannot comment on whether a patent will issue
against that IP even so.

> 
> Those observations may, when taken back to our interested parties, may
> stimulate proper legal process actions to object to or support a
> particular patent application.

The issue may be that there is a responsibility in the representative to
take that info back to their corporate or sponsor legal officer for
review as well.

> The open discussion in the IETF can
> make a meaningful contribution, even if the opions on their own have
> no legal standing.
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@xxxxxxxx
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
> 

begin:vcard
fn:Todd Glassey
n:Glassey;Todd
email;internet:TGlassey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
version:2.1
end:vcard

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

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