Good idea. I've added a comment to the tracker in the History section
for both documents.
pr
On 2/29/12 4:12 AM, t.petch wrote:
Pete
I agree with what you have done but would like to see it recorded in something
more accessible than an e-mail archive. Could it be added to the data tracker,
under IESG evaluation or IESG writeup or some such?
Tom Petch
----- Original Message -----
From: "Pete Resnick"<presnick@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "IETF-Discussion list"<ietf@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 9:32 PM
I wanted to inform the community of the results of the second Last Call
issued for draft-ietf-sieve-convert and
draft-ietf-sieve-notify-sip-message. To remind you of the circumstances:
After these two documents were approved by the IESG and sent on to the
RFC Editor, an IPR disclosure was made pertaining to each of them
indicating that one of the document editors for both documents was also
the listed inventor for the disclosed patent. The disclosures were made
by the document editor's employer and indicate that the date of the
patent filings was prior to the adoption of these two drafts by the
SIEVE working group. The RFC Editor was asked to suspend their work on
the documents, and a second Last Call was made.
After reviewing discussions in the SIEVE WG and on the IETF mailing
list, the chairs have decided (and I support) that, because of the
failure to disclose the IPR as required by BCP 79 (RFC 3979), and as per
RFC 2418 Section 6.1, the following actions are appropriate and will be
taken:
- The document editor in question is no longer a document editor for
these two documents.
- The person's name will be removed from the front page of the documents
and from the Authors' Address section.
- The person's name will be added to the Acknowledgments section of both
documents to identify that he did contribute text to the drafts.
- The RFC Editor will be asked to continue processing and publication of
these drafts as RFCs.
We will be notifying the RFC Editor of this decision presently.
Meanwhile, the employer of the document editor in question has made
followup disclosures on each of the documents, saying that they
"covenant not to assert any such claim against any party for making,
using, selling, offering for sale or importing a product that implements
the corresponding part of the specification." The full text of the
disclosures can be seen here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1680/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1681/
pr
--
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
--
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf