--On Thursday, September 19, 2013 07:57 +1200 Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 17/09/2013 05:34, Alan Clark wrote: > ... >> It should be noted that the duty to disclose IPR is NOT ONLY >> for the authors of a draft, and the IETF "reminder" system >> seems to be focused solely on authors. The duty to disclose >> IPR lies with any individual or company that participates in >> the IETF not just authors. > > Companies don't participate in the IETF; the duty of > disclosure is specifically placed on individual contributors > and applies to patents "reasonably and personally known" to > them. > > IANAL but I did read the BCP. Brian, That isn't how I interpreted Alan's point. My version would be that, if the shepherd template writeup says "make sure that the authors are up-to-date" (or anything equivalent) it should also say "ask/remind the WG participants too". IMO, that is a perfectly reasonable and orderly suggestion (and no lawyer is required to figure it out). One inference from Glen's point that authors have already certified that they have provided anything they need to provide by the time an I-D is posted with the "full compliance" language is that it may actually be more important to remind general participants in the WG than to ask the authors. john