Re: IESG Considering a Revision to NOTE WELL

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

 



On Nov 6, 2012, at 10:54 AM, Fred Baker (fred) <fred@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> Not being a lawyer, I can't comment on the legal details of IPR cases. What I am looking at is the understandability of a statement. A lawyer that I was speaking with recently told me that the IETF IPR policy is ambiguous; one must file IPR statements for standards, but not for informational documents. We wound up wandering through the details of legal statements, in which I felt he was working pretty hard to make words stand on their heads.

in case anyone wonders

one might have been able to read that into RFC 2026 but that was very carefully fixed
in the current documents - disclosures are required for ALL contributions

Scott


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