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

----- Original Message ----- From: C.T. Aiken To: TS Glassey Cc: ipr-wg at ietf.org Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 8:26 PM Subject: Re: Jorge - Answer these question - or face litigation and the ethics committee of your licensing bar assoc's Todd, While I'm not an attorney (yet), hopefully my answers can satisfy you to some extent. Again, if you want nuanced legal analysis, get a lawyer. I have one. Here are the questions as they were asked... 1) YES OR NO?: Under certain circumstances could the publication of IETF documents prevent Japanese PaFrom ipr-wg-bounces at ietf.org Wed Jul 23 20:54:05 2008 Return-Path: <ipr-wg-bounces at ietf.org> X-Original-To: ipr-wg-archive at megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-ipr-wg-archive at core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD62C3A69C0; Wed, 23 Jul 2008 20:54:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: ipr-wg at core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ipr-wg at core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC17D3A69C0 for <ipr-wg at core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Jul 2008 20:54:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.443 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.443 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.155, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id K3Ddq1TD5U-Y for <ipr-wg at core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Jul 2008 20:54:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net (elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.65]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 429443A67EC for <ipr-wg at ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Jul 2008 20:54:03 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; dêrthlink.net; b=kux7KaRz6evMxvdk6tPTiIiEi4S9vz7NbHoot+eSto8xM0lpGiEovKJb4yuk+3xP; h=Received:Message-ID:From:To:Cc:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [24.23.176.93] (helo=tsg1) by elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from <tglassey at earthlink.net>) id 1KLruc-0005vn-LZ; Wed, 23 Jul 2008 23:54:43 -0400 Message-ID: <005e01c8ed41$059e0b80$6401a8c0 at tsg1> From: "TS Glassey" <tglassey at earthlink.net> To: "C.T. Aiken" <ctaiken at gmail.com> References: <004501c8ec0a$0ed3d190$0200a8c0 at tsg1> <8539cb8c0807232026q7ddd5101uecdac8019e90cf39 at mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: Jorge - Answer these question - or face litigation and the ethics committee of your licensing bar assoc's Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2008 20:54:47 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 X-ELNK-Trace: 01b7a7e171bdf5911aa676d7e74259b7b3291a7d08dfec7911163a2c49bb7e6a48cfd13bce67869e350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 24.23.176.93 Cc: ipr-wg at ietf.org X-BeenThere: ipr-wg at ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: IPR-WG <ipr-wg.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg>, <mailto:ipr-wg-request at ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/ipr-wg> List-Post: <mailto:ipr-wg at ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:ipr-wg-request at ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg>, <mailto:ipr-wg-request at ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="==============37412085==" Sender: ipr-wg-bounces at ietf.org Errors-To: ipr-wg-bounces at ietf.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

----- Original Message -----

From: C.T. Aiken

To: TS Glassey

Cc: ipr-wg at ietf.org

Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 8:26 PM

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

Todd,

While I'm not an attorney (yet), hopefully my answers can satisfy you to some extent. Again, if you want nuanced legal analysis, get a lawyer.

I have one.

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?:

I'm afraid Japanese patent law is an area that I simply cannot give you a competent answer on with any degree of certainty.

Thanks.

Like I said in the other thread, if it is a first to file jurisdiction (without any substantial modifications), the patent applicant would always win unless the IETF somehow decided to file a patent in Japan earlier. If it is a first to discover jurisdiction, as long as you can prove you came up with the idea first and don't fall afoul of any of the statutory bars, the patent is yours.

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 the U.S., certainly. Publication starts the time clock for the 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) statutory bar.

Which was the point. So how many of the Sponsor's have any idea about this? How many of the HR managers around who are writing the checks for the IETF attendance have any idea that their employee's are making formal conveyances of their IP to the IETF. I already have the answer there.

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?:

You're quoting selectively from the BCP. The policy is balancing interests, not an paean to IP holders.

Thats not what it says. It says that the IETF respects other's rights. What I asked is what that phrase means. You say those words are hollow and unfonded? That means how much of the rest of the language of the contract is equally unreliable.

What I want to have the IETF formally answer is whether it respects others IP rights including their patent rights. Because again the BCP rules prevent the induction of IP for any standards process where the IP is not fully transfered to the IETF. Without the perfected conveyance event, the UCC says that the IETF's outgoing license is garbage too.

--
C.T. Aiken

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com 
Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.5.5/1569 - Release Date: 7/23/2008 1:31 PM