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

Re: Jorge - Answer these question - or face litigation and the ethicscommittee of your licensing bar assoc's

Larry More smoke and mirrors - But its your response that is unethical Counsel.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Lawrence Rosen" <lrosen at rosenlaw.com> To: "'TS Glassey'" <tglassey at earthlink.net>; "'Contreras, Jorge'" <Jorge.Contreras at wilmerhale.com>; <chair at ietf.org>; "'Ray Pelletier - ISOC'" <rpelletier at isoc.org> 
Cc: <ipr-wg at ietf.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:02 AM
Subject: RE: Jorge - Answer these question - or face litigation and the ethicscommittee of your licensing bar assoc's 



Dear all,

As Jorge keeps reminding everyone, I am not IETF's attorney. But I am an
attorney, and so I am personally disgusted by the behavior of Todd Glassey
toward another attorney on this forum.
Why - because I am threatening to force the IETF because to answer the questions as to whether the IETF's actions interfere with the rights of others at the patent level? You find that offensive - to be accountable for your and others actions here.
All you as a licesned attorney had to do is to tell this WG I am formally wrong - that the IETF's actions never impugn or interfere with a patent application anywhere...
But rather than answer that question - you have this "Outraged Attorney" routine here. I suggest that maybe this warrants an Ethics Compliant against you to Counsel. 



There is a code of behavior among attorneys and presumably their clients
that promotes the calm and reasoned discussion of issues.
I am not a licensed attorney. You are... So those rules dont apply to me. Besides calm discussion is exactly what you and others are trying to prevent. I opened the question as to whether the IETF's processes interfer with US and Japanese Patent Filing abilitities, and you nor Jorge has answered that. Jorge says that the IETF's processes dont address patent's - but that wasnt my quesiton. My question was whether the PRIOR ART that the IETF's publications put in place interfere with Patent Filings. The answer is that they can if the timing is right for those interferences and certain other issues have not been addressed prior to any public diusclosure in any form. But neither you Larry or Jorge seems willing to agree that this is true. You also wont say it isnt true meaning you simply refuse to answer the question. 




That code does not
allow anyone to insist to anyone else that certain "questions" be answered. 

Garbage. There is NO Code that you speak of - it simply doesnt exist.


There is simply no obligation by anyone to do so short of a subpoena.
No as the IETF's Counsel and an Officer of the Court it is his legally controlled requirement to act both ethically and within the US Law. We are asking a question of law here as to whether the IETF's process violates US or Japanese Patent Law in the models cited. 



If people have questions they are expected to hire their own attorneys to
get them answered.


I have already gotten exactly that


My ONLY advice to Todd is that he retain his own attorney
to answer his questions.
Dont need one - Jorge represents me and my IP after its submitted to the IETF. Any failing there violates my Attorney Client Reliations and opens Wilmer Hale and Jorge to Malpractice Claims. The IETF's Attorney's represent the IETF itself which means me as well as all the other IETF member's. Refusing to do so will open yet another claim against the IETF.
At some point, IETF needs a policy to shut down some insulting communicators 
for the welfare of the other IETF participants.


What is insulting here about being forced to answer a question?


I've apologized before when
I crossed the line in my emails.
If you are talking about when you called me STUPID last week, then this answer of yours is a lie. You apologized for calling me stupid in an offlist convo with Jorge and the IETF chair because I put you in a postion where he (the Chair) would formally have to notice you if you didnt.
The problem is that the Chair failed to put you on notice for using that nasty word at me, it just accepted your apology. So already we have the chair acting with others in a different light than it acts with me. 


I wish now that Todd would apologize and
shut up, or that IETF enforce a formal policy to shut him up.
You mean you want my permanent silence whether its voluntary or not... Seems pretty abusive to me. It also doesnt answer the questions formally for the IETF and the record as to whether IETF processes can interfere with or prevent Patent Filing's or not per the terms of the three quesitons. 

You still havent answered that question Larry... Neither has Jorge...




/Larry

Lawrence Rosen
Rosenlaw & Einschlag, a technology law firm (www.rosenlaw.com)
3001 King Ranch Road, Ukiah, CA 95482
707-485-1242 * cell: 707-478-8932 * fax: 707-485-1243
Skype: LawrenceRosen



-----Original Message-----
From: ipr-wg-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:ipr-wg-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf
Of TS Glassey
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 7:48 AM
To: Contreras, Jorge; chair at ietf.org; Ray Pelletier - ISOC
Cc: ipr-wg at ietf.org
Subject: Jorge - Answer these question - or face litigation and the
ethicscommittee of your licensing bar assoc's
Importance: High

Jorge -

I asked you these same questions a number of times,  and you have
intentionally answered any number of other questions rather than the ones
I
have asked, and you have done so in a manner that tries to invalidate the
questions that were asked.

I now have formal proof of my commentary about how the IETF's filing
process
prevents IP Patent's from being filed either here in the US or Japan based 
on the works of the IETF being formally included in the definition of
PRIOR
ART by the US Patent office and the Japanese Patent office. So unless you 
can disprove this commentary, it will have to stand as the truth.It also
will formally put the IPR WG and more importantly their sponsor's that the 
IETF's conspiracy and direct actions in trying to make US Patent's
impossible to protect just blew up in its face...

Here are the questions as they were asked...

1)  YES OR NO?:   Under certain circumstances could the publication of
IETF
documents prevent Japanese Patent's from being granted for a Prior Art
violations?  YES or NO?:

Here is some good JPO info...
http://www.epo.org/patents/patent-information/east-
asian/helpdesk/japan/faq.html

http://www.jpo.go.jp/cgi/linke.cgi?url=/seido_e/s_gaiyou_e/4houe.htm

    2)  YES OR NO?:  Does the publication of IETF documents trigger the
one
year time-clocks on registering materials described in those documents for 
US patent protection? i.e. could the IETF's publication of documents
interact with or proscribe US and foreign patent filings in some
instances?
YES or NO?:

In re this question, my research at the US PTO is below. It tells me that
this also is true so unless you can tell me otherwise... According to the
US
PTO apparently all Scientific Publications are considered PRIOR ART
http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/documents/2100_2128.htm .

Also notice the comment at the bottom of the page "about not having to
ever
have been read" just submitted to the IETF. That means whether the IETF
publishes of not doesn't matter. Registering the IP with the IETF Trust
for
publication is the act which topples  your house of cards. If you need
more
see also http://www.iusmentis.com/patents/priorart/#whatispriorart for a
rolling
layman's commentary on the issue of PRIOR ART.

As long as we are at it. Lets ask another nasty one...

    3) YES or NO?:  Does the IETF's "respect of other's IP's" per the
description of BCP78 ss 3.1 include US and Foreign patents?  YES or NO?:

So Jorge - unless you are formally saying the US and Japanese Patent
Office's websites are wrong, can you please answer the two questions above please formally here for Ray and the IETF Chair? And especially Question 3 
before I have a Judge tell you to answer these same questions in a Court
of
Law. One which we both know will in fact happen if you don't answer those
questions formally here.

Jorge - [in my best Pee Wee Herman] I'm Still Waiting.


---
Personal Disclaimers Apply

TS Glassey

_______________________________________________
Ipr-wg mailing list
Ipr-wg at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.5.4/1566 - Release Date: 7/22/2008 6:00 AM 





_______________________________________________
Ipr-wg mailing list
Ipr-wg at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg