idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-ipr-technology-rights-11.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** It looks like you're using RFC 3978 boilerplate. You should update this to the boilerplate described in the IETF Trust License Policy document (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info), which is required now. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 2 on line 368. ** The document claims conformance with section 10 of RFC 2026, but uses some RFC 3978/3979 boilerplate. As RFC 3978/3979 replaces section 10 of RFC 2026, you should not claim conformance with it if you have changed to using RFC 3978/3979 boilerplate. ** The document seems to lack an RFC 3978 Section 5.1 IPR Disclosure Acknowledgement. ** This document has an original RFC 3978 Section 5.4 Copyright Line, instead of the newer IETF Trust Copyright according to RFC 4748. ** The document seems to lack an RFC 3978 Section 5.4 Reference to BCP 78. ** The document seems to lack an RFC 3978 Section 5.5 (updated by RFC 4748) Disclaimer -- however, there's a paragraph with a matching beginning. Boilerplate error? ** The document seems to lack an RFC 3979 Section 5, para. 1 IPR Disclosure Acknowledgement. ** The document seems to lack an RFC 3979 Section 5, para. 3 IPR Disclosure Invitation -- however, there's a paragraph with a matching beginning. Boilerplate error? Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Missing expiration date. The document expiration date should appear on the first and last page. == No 'Intended status' indicated for this document; assuming Proposed Standard Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack an IANA Considerations section. (See Section 2.2 of https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist for how to handle the case when there are no actions for IANA.) -- The abstract seems to indicate that this document updates RFC2026, but the header doesn't have an 'Updates:' line to match this. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the RFC 3978 Section 5.4 Copyright Line does not match the current year == The "Author's Address" (or "Authors' Addresses") section title is misspelled. == Line 249 has weird spacing: '...e right of IE...' == Line 310 has weird spacing: '...ain the right...' -- The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. If you have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore this comment. If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (August 2003) is 7560 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) == Unused Reference: 'RFC 2418' is defined on line 677, but no explicit reference was found in the text ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 2028 (Obsoleted by RFC 9281) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 2518 (ref. 'RFC 2418') (Obsoleted by RFC 4918) -- No information found for draft-iprwg-submission - is the name correct? -- Possible downref: Normative reference to a draft: ref. 'IETF SUB' Summary: 12 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 6 warnings (==), 6 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group S. Bradner 3 Internet-Draft Harvard U. 4 Editor 5 August 2003 7 Intellectual Property Rights in IETF Technology 9 11 Status of this Memo 13 This document is an Internet-Draft and is subject to all provisions 14 of Section 10 of RFC 2026. 16 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 17 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that 18 other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- 19 Drafts. 21 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 22 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 23 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 24 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 26 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 27 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt 29 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 30 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html 32 Abstract 34 The IETF policies about Intellectual Property Rights (IPR), such as 35 patent rights, relative to technologies developed in the IETF are 36 designed to ensure that IETF working groups and participants have as 37 much information about any IPR constraints on a technical proposal as 38 possible. The policies are also intended to benefit the Internet 39 community and the public at large, while respecting the legitimate 40 rights of IPR holders. This memo details the IETF policies 41 concerning IPR related to technology worked on within the IETF. It 42 also describes the objectives that the policies are designed to meet. 43 This memo updates RFC 2026 and, with RFC XXXY, replaces Section 10 of 44 RFC 2026. This memo also updates paragraph 4 of Section 3.2 of RFC 45 2028 and replaces reference 2 in RFC 2418. [note to RFC editor - 46 replace XXXY with number of IETF SUB] 48 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003) 50 Table of Contents 52 Status of this Memo ................................................1 53 Abstract ...........................................................1 54 1. Definitions ....................................................2 55 2. Introduction ...................................................5 56 3. Contributions to the IETF ......................................6 57 3.1 General Policy ..............................................6 58 3.2 Rights and Permissions ......................................6 59 4. Actions for Documents for which IPR Disclosure(s) 60 Have Been Received .............................................7 61 4.1 No Determination of Reasonable and Non-discriminatory Terms ..7 62 5. Notice to be included in RFCs .................................8 63 6. IPR Disclosures ................................................9 64 6.1 Who must make an IPR disclosure? ............................9 65 6.2 The timing of providing disclosure ..........................9 66 6.3 How must a disclosure be made? .............................10 67 6.4 What must be in a disclosure? ..............................10 68 6.5 What licensing information to detail in a disclosure .......11 69 6.6 When is a disclosure required? .............................12 70 7. Failure to disclose ...........................................12 71 8. Evaluating alternative technologies in IETF working groups ....12 72 9. Change control for technologies ...............................13 73 10. Licensing requirements to advance standards track documents ...14 74 11. No IPR disclosures in IETF documents ..........................14 75 12. Security Considerations .......................................14 76 13. References ....................................................14 77 13.1 Normative References .......................................14 78 13.2 Informative References .....................................15 79 14. Acknowledgements ..............................................15 80 15. Editors Address ...............................................15 81 16. Full copyright statement ......................................15 83 1. Definitions 85 The following definitions are for terms used in the context of this 86 document. Other terms, including "IESG," "ISOC," "IAB," and "RFC 87 Editor," are defined in [RFC 2028]. 89 a. "IETF": In the context of this document, the IETF includes all 90 individuals who participate in meetings, working groups, mailing 91 lists, functions and other activities which are organized or 92 initiated by ISOC, the IESG or the IAB under the general 93 designation of the Internet Engineering Task Force or IETF, but 94 solely to the extent of such participation. 96 b. "IETF Standards Process": the activities undertaken by the IETF in 97 any of the settings described in 1(c) below. 99 c. "IETF Contribution": any submission to the IETF intended by the 100 Contributor for publication as an Internet-Draft or RFC (except 101 for RFC Editor Contributions described below) and any statement 102 made within the context of an IETF activity. Such statements 103 include oral statements in IETF sessions, as well as written and 104 electronic communications made at any time or place, which are 105 addressed to: 106 o the IETF plenary session, 107 o any IETF working group or portion thereof, 108 o the IESG, or any member thereof on behalf of the IESG, 109 o the IAB or any member thereof on behalf of the IAB, 110 o any IETF mailing list, including the IETF list itself, any 111 working group or design team list, or any other list 112 functioning under IETF auspices, 113 o the RFC Editor or the Internet-Drafts function (except for RFC 114 Editor Contributions described below). 116 Statements made outside of an IETF session, mailing list or other 117 function, that are clearly not intended to be input to an IETF 118 activity, group or function, are not IETF Contributions in the 119 context of this document. 121 d. "Internet-Draft": temporary documents used in the IETF and RFC 122 Editor processes. Internet-Drafts are posted on the IETF web site 123 by the IETF Secretariat and have a nominal maximum lifetime in the 124 Secretariat's public directory of 6 months, after which they are 125 removed. Note that Internet-Drafts are archived many places on 126 the Internet, and not all of these places remove expired Internet- 127 Drafts. Internet-Drafts that are under active consideration by 128 the IESG are not removed from the Secretariat's public directory 129 until that consideration is complete. In addition, the author of 130 an Internet-Draft can request that the lifetime in the 131 Secretariat's public directory be extended before the expiration. 133 e. "RFC": the basic publication series for the IETF. RFCs are 134 published by the RFC Editor and once published are never modified. 135 (See [RFC 2026] Section 2.1) 137 f. "RFC Editor Contribution": An Internet-Draft intended by the 138 Contributor to be submitted to the RFC Editor for publication as 139 an Informational or Experimental RFC but not intended to be part 140 of the IETF Standards Process. 142 g. "IETF Internet-Drafts": Internet-Drafts other than RFC Editor 143 Contributions. Note that under Section 3.3(a) the grant of rights 144 in regards to IETF Internet-Drafts as specified in this document 145 is perpetual and irrevocable and thus survives the Secretariat's 146 removal of an Internet-Draft from the public directory, except as 147 limited by Section 3.3(a)(C). (See [RFC 2026] Sections 2.2 and 8) 149 h. "RFC Editor Internet-Drafts": Internet-Drafts that are RFC Editor 150 Contributions. 152 i. "IETF Documents": RFCs and Internet-Drafts except for Internet- 153 Drafts that are RFC Editor Contributions and the RFCs that are 154 published from them. 156 j. "RFC Editor Documents": RFCs and Internet-Drafts that are RFC 157 Editor Contributions and the RFCs that may be published from them. 159 k. "Contribution": IETF Contributions and RFC Editor Contributions 161 l. "Contributor": an individual submitting a Contribution 163 m. "Reasonably and personally known": means something an individual 164 knows personally or, because of the job the individual holds, 165 would reasonably be expected to know. This wording is used to 166 indicate that an organization cannot purposely keep an individual 167 in the dark about patents or patent applications just to avoid the 168 disclosure requirement. But this requirement should not be 169 interpreted as requiring the IETF Contributor or participant (or 170 his or her represented organization, if any) to perform a patent 171 search to find applicable IPR. 173 n. "Implementing Technology": means a technology that implements an 174 IETF specification or standard. 176 o. "Covers" or "Covered" mean that a valid claim of a patent or a 177 patent application in any jurisdiction or a protected claim, or 178 any other Intellectual Property Right, would necessarily be 179 infringed by the exercise of a right (e.g., making, using, 180 selling, importing, distribution, copying, etc) with respect to an 181 Implementing Technology. For purposes of this definition, "valid 182 claim" means a claim of any unexpired patent or patent application 183 which shall not have been withdrawn, cancelled or disclaimed, nor 184 held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction in an unappealed 185 or unappealable decision. 187 p. "IPR" or "Intellectual Property Rights": means patent, copyright, 188 utility model, invention registration, database and data rights 189 that may Cover an Implementing Technology, whether such rights 190 arise from a registration or renewal thereof, or an application 191 therefore, in each case anywhere in the world. 193 2. Introduction 195 In the years since RFC 2026 was published there have been a number of 196 times when the exact intent of Section 10, the section which deals 197 with IPR disclosures has been the subject of vigorous debate within 198 the IETF community. This is because it is becoming increasingly 199 common for IETF working groups to have to deal with claims of 200 Intellectual Property Rights (IPR), such as patent rights, with 201 regards to technology under discussion in working groups. The aim of 202 this document is to clarify various ambiguities in Section 10 of [RFC 203 2026] that led to these debates and to amplify the policy in order to 204 clarify what the IETF is, or should be, doing. 206 IPR disclosures can come at any point in the IETF Standards Process, 207 e.g., before the first Internet-Draft has been submitted, prior to 208 RFC publication, or after an RFC has been published and the working 209 group has been closed down; they can come from people submitting 210 technical proposals as Internet-Drafts, on mailing lists or at 211 meetings, from other people participating in the working group or 212 from third parties who find out that the work is going or has gone 213 on; and they can be based on granted patents or on patent 214 applications, and in some cases be disingenuous, i.e., made to affect 215 the IETF Standards Process rather than to inform. 217 RFC 2026 Section 10 established three basic principles regarding the 218 IETF dealing with claims of Intellectual Property Rights: 220 (a) the IETF will make no determination about the validity of any 221 particular IPR claim 222 (b) the IETF following normal processes can decide to use technology 223 for which IPR disclosures have been made if it decides that such a 224 use is warranted 225 (c) in order for the working group and the rest of the IETF to have 226 the information needed to make an informed decision about the use 227 of a particular technology, all those contributing to the working 228 group's discussions must disclose the existence of any IPR the 229 Contributor or other IETF participant believes Covers or may 230 ultimately Cover the technology under discussion. This applies to 231 both Contributors and other participants, and applies whether they 232 contribute in person, via email or by other means. The 233 requirement applies to all IPR of the participant, the 234 participant's employer, sponsor, or others represented by the 235 participants, that is reasonably and personally known to the 236 person submitting the disclosure. No patent search is required. 238 Section 1 defines the terms used in this document. Sections 3, 4 and 239 5 of this document address the intellectual property issues 240 previously addressed by Section 10 of RFC 2026. Sections 6 thru 12 241 then explain the rationale for these provisions, including some of 242 the clarifications that have been made since the adoption of RFC 243 2026. The rules and procedures set out in this document are not 244 intended to modify or alter the IETF's current policy toward IPR in 245 the context of the IETF Standards Process. They are intended to 246 clarify and fill in procedural gaps. 248 A companion document [IETF SUB] deals with rights (such as copyrights 249 and trademarks) in Contributions, including the right of IETF and 250 its participants to publish and create derivative works of those 251 Contributions. This document is not intended to address those 252 issues. 254 This document is not intended as legal advice. Readers are advised 255 to consult their own legal advisors if they would like a legal 256 interpretation of their rights or the rights of the IETF in any 257 Contributions they make. 259 3. Contributions to the IETF 261 3.1. General Policy 262 In all matters of Intellectual Property Rights, the intent is to 263 benefit the Internet community and the public at large, while 264 respecting the legitimate rights of others. 266 3.2. Rights and Permissions 268 3.2.1. All Contributions 269 By submission of a Contribution, each person actually submitting the 270 Contribution, and each named co-Contributor, is deemed to agree to 271 the following terms and conditions, on his or her own behalf, and on 272 behalf of the organizations the Contributor represents or is 273 sponsored by (if any) when submitting the Contribution. 275 A. The Contributor represents that he or she has made or will 276 promptly make all disclosures required by Section 6.1.1 of this 277 document. 279 B. The Contributor represents that there are no limits to the 280 Contributor's ability to make the grants, acknowledgments and 281 agreements herein that are reasonably and personally known to the 282 Contributor. 284 C. If the Contribution is an Internet-Draft, this agreement must be 285 acknowledged, by including in the "Status of this Memo" section on 286 the first page of the Contribution, the appropriate notices 287 described in Section 5 of [IETF SUB]. 289 4. Actions for Documents for which IPR Disclosure(s) Have Been Received 291 (A) When any Intellectual Property Right is disclosed before 292 publication as a RFC, with respect to any technology or 293 specification, described in a Contribution in the manner set forth 294 in Section 6 of this document, the RFC Editor shall ensure that 295 the document include a note indicating the existence of such 296 claimed Intellectual Property Rights in any RFC published from the 297 Contribution. (See Section 5 below.) 299 (B) The IESG disclaims any responsibility for identifying the 300 existence of or for evaluating the applicability of any IPR, 301 disclosed or otherwise, to any IETF technology, specification or 302 standard, and will take no position on the validity or scope of 303 any such IPR claims. 305 (C) Where Intellectual Property Rights have been disclosed for IETF 306 Documents as provided in Section 6 of this document, the IETF 307 Executive Director shall request from the discloser of such IPR, a 308 written assurance that upon approval by the IESG for publication 309 as RFCs of the relevant IETF specification(s), all persons will be 310 able to obtain the right to implement, use, distribute and 311 exercise other rights with respect to Implementing Technology 312 under one of the licensing options specified in Section 6.5 below 313 unless such a statement has already been submitted. The working 314 group proposing the use of the technology with respect to which 315 the Intellectual Property Rights are disclosed may assist the IETF 316 Executive Director in this effort. 318 The results of this procedure shall not, in themselves, block 319 publication of an IETF Document or advancement of an IETF Document 320 along the standards track. A working group may take into 321 consideration the results of this procedure in evaluating the 322 technology, and the IESG may defer approval when a delay may 323 facilitate obtaining such assurances. The results will, however, 324 be recorded by the IETF Executive Director, and be made available 325 online. 327 4.1 No Determination of Reasonable and Non-discriminatory Terms 328 The IESG will not make any explicit determination that the assurance 329 of reasonable and non-discriminatory terms or any other terms for the 330 use of an Implementing Technology has been fulfilled in practice. It 331 will instead apply the normal requirements for the advancement of 332 Internet Standards. If the two unrelated implementations of the 333 specification that are required to advance from Proposed Standard to 334 Draft Standard have been produced by different organizations or 335 individuals, or if the "significant implementation and successful 336 operational experience" required to advance from Draft Standard to 337 Standard has been achieved, the IESG will presume that the terms are 338 reasonable and to some degree non-discriminatory. (See RFC 2026 339 Section 4.1.3.) Note that this also applies to the case where 340 multiple implementers have concluded that no licensing is required. 341 This presumption may be challenged at any time, including during the 342 Last-Call period by sending email to the IESG. 344 5. Notice to be included in RFCs 346 The RFC Editor will ensure that the following notice is present in 347 all IETF RFCs and all other RFCs for which an IPR disclosure has been 348 received prior to publication. 350 Disclaimer of validity: 352 "The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any 353 Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed 354 to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology 355 described in this document or the extent to which any license 356 under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it 357 represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any 358 such rights. Information on the IETF's procedures with respect to 359 rights in IETF Documents can be found in RFC XX and RFC XY. [note 360 to RFC Editor - replace XX with the number of this document and 361 replace XY with number of IETF SUB.] 363 Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any 364 assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an 365 attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use 366 of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this 367 specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository 368 at http://www.ietf.org/ipr. 370 The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention 371 any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other 372 proprietary rights that may cover technology that may be required 373 to implement this standard. Please address the information to the 374 IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org." 376 6. IPR Disclosures 378 This section discusses aspects of obligations associated with IPR 379 disclosure. 381 This document refers to the IETF participant making disclosures, 382 consistent with the general IETF philosophy that participants in the 383 IETF act as individuals. A participant's obligation to make a 384 disclosure is also considered satisfied if the IPR owner or the 385 participant's employer or sponsor makes an appropriate disclosure in 386 place of the participant doing so. 388 6.1 Who must make an IPR disclosure? 390 6.1.1 A Contributor's IPR in his or her Contribution 391 Any Contributor who reasonably and personally knows of IPR meeting 392 the conditions of Section 6.6 which the Contributor believes Covers 393 or may ultimately Cover his or her Contribution, or which the 394 Contributor reasonably and personally knows his or her employer or 395 sponsor may assert against Implementing Technologies based on such 396 Contribution, must make a disclosure in accordance with this Section 397 6. 399 This requirement specifically includes Contributions that are made by 400 any means including electronic or spoken comments, unless the latter 401 are rejected from consideration before a disclosure could reasonably 402 be submitted. An IPR discloser is requested to withdraw a previous 403 disclosure if a revised Contribution negates the previous IPR 404 disclosure, or to amend a previous disclosure if a revised 405 Contribution substantially alters the previous disclosure. 407 Contributors must disclose IPR meeting the description in this 408 section; there are no exceptions to this rule. 410 6.1.2. An IETF participant's IPR in Contributions by others 411 Any individual participating in an IETF discussion who reasonably and 412 personally knows of IPR meeting the conditions of Section 6.6 which 413 the individual believes Covers or may ultimately Cover a Contribution 414 made by another person, or which such IETF participant reasonably and 415 personally knows his or her employer or sponsor may assert against 416 Implementing Technologies based on such Contribution, must make a 417 disclosure in accordance with this Section 6. 419 6.1.3. IPR of others 420 If a person has information about IPR that may Cover IETF 421 Contributions, but the participant is not required to disclose 422 because they do not meet the criteria in Section 6.6 (e.g., the IPR 423 is owned by some other company), such person is encouraged to notify 424 the IETF by sending an email message to ietf-ipr@ietf.org. Such a 425 notice should be sent as soon as reasonably possible after the person 426 realizes the connection. 428 6.2. The timing of providing disclosure 429 Timely IPR disclosure is important because working groups need to 430 have as much information as they can while they are evaluating 431 alternative solutions. 433 6.2.1 Timing of disclosure under Section 6.1.1 434 The IPR disclosure required pursuant to section 6.1.1 must be made as 435 soon as reasonably possible after the Contribution is published in an 436 Internet Draft unless the required disclosure is already on file. 437 For example, if the Contribution is an update to a Contribution for 438 which an IPR disclosure has already been made and the applicability 439 of the disclosure is not changed by the new Contribution, then no new 440 disclosure is required. But if the Contribution is a new one, or is 441 one that changes an existing Contribution such that the revised 442 Contribution is no longer Covered by the disclosed IPR or would be 443 Covered by new or different IPR, then a disclosure must be made. 445 If a Contributor first learns of IPR in its Contribution that meets 446 the conditions of Section 6.6, for example a new patent application 447 or the discovery of a relevant patent in a patent portfolio, after 448 the Contribution is published as an Internet-Draft, a disclosure must 449 be made as soon as reasonably possible after the IPR becomes 450 reasonably and personally known to the Contributor. 452 Participants who realize that a Contribution will be or has been 453 incorporated into a submission to be published as an Internet Draft, 454 or is seriously being discussed in a working group, are strongly 455 encouraged to make at least a preliminary disclosure. That 456 disclosure should be made as soon after coming to the realization as 457 reasonably possible, not waiting until the document is actually 458 posted or ready for posting. 460 6.2.2 Timing of disclosure under Section 6.1.2 461 The IPR disclosure required pursuant to section 6.1.2 must be made as 462 soon as reasonably possible after the Contribution is published in an 463 Internet Draft or RFC, unless the required disclosure is already on 464 file. Participants who realize that the IPR will be or has been 465 incorporated into a submission to be published as an Internet Draft, 466 or is seriously being discussed in a working group, are strongly 467 encouraged to make at least a preliminary disclosure. That 468 disclosure should be made as soon after coming to the realization as 469 reasonably possible, not waiting until the document is actually 470 posted or ready for posting. 472 If a Contributor first learns of IPR that meets the conditions of 473 Section 6.6 in a Contribution by another party, for example a new 474 patent application or the discovery of a relevant patent in a patent 475 portfolio, after the Contribution was published as an Internet-Draft 476 or RFC, a disclosure must be made as soon as reasonably possible 477 after the IPR becomes reasonably and personally known to the 478 Contributor. 480 6.3 How must a disclosure be made? 481 IPR disclosures are made by following the instructions at 482 http://www.ietf.org/ipr-instructions. 484 6.4 What must be in a disclosure? 485 6.4.1 The disclosure must list the numbers of any issued patents or 486 published patent applications or indicate that the claim is based on 487 unpublished patent applications. The disclosure must also list the 488 specific IETF or RFC Editor Document(s) or activity affected. If the 489 IETF Document is an Internet-Draft, it must be referenced by specific 490 version number. In addition, if the IETF Document includes multiple 491 parts and it is not reasonably apparent which part of such IETF 492 Document is alleged to be Covered by the IPR in question, it is 493 helpful if the discloser identifies the sections of the IETF Document 494 that are alleged to be so Covered. 496 6.4.2 If a disclosure was made on the basis of a patent application 497 (either published or unpublished), then, if requested to do so by the 498 IESG or by a working group chair, the IETF Executive Director can 499 request a new disclosure indicating whether any of the following has 500 occurred: the publication of a previously unpublished patent 501 application, the abandonment of the application and/or the issuance 502 of a patent thereon. If the patent has issued, then the new 503 disclosure must include the patent number and, if the claims of the 504 granted patent differ from those of the application in manner 505 material to the relevant Contribution, it is helpful if such a 506 disclosure describes any differences in applicability to the 507 Contribution. If the patent application was abandoned, then the new 508 disclosure must explicitly withdraw any earlier disclosures based on 509 the application. 511 New or revised disclosures may be made voluntarily at any time. 513 6.4.3 The requirement for an IPR disclosure is not satisfied by the 514 submission of a blanket statement of possible IPR on every 515 Contribution. This is the case because the aim of the disclosure 516 requirement is to provide information about specific IPR against 517 specific technology under discussion in the IETF. The requirement is 518 also not satisfied by a blanket statement of willingness to license 519 all potential IPR under fair and non-discriminatory terms for the 520 same reason. However, the requirement for an IPR disclosure is 521 satisfied by a blanket statement of the IPR discloser's willingness 522 to license all of its potential IPR meeting the requirements of 523 Section 6.6 (and either Section 6.1.1 or 6.1.2) to implementers of an 524 IETF specification on a royalty-free basis as long as any other terms 525 and conditions are disclosed in the IPR disclosure statement. 527 6.5 What licensing information to detail in a disclosure. 529 Since IPR disclosures will be used by IETF working groups during 530 their evaluation of alternative technical solutions, it is helpful if 531 an IPR disclosure includes information about licensing of the IPR in 532 case Implementing Technologies require a license. Specifically, it 533 is helpful to indicate whether, upon approval by the IESG for 534 publication as RFCs of the relevant IETF specification(s), all 535 persons will be able to obtain the right to implement, use, 536 distribute and exercise other rights with respect to an Implementing 537 Technology a) under a royalty-free and otherwise reasonable and non- 538 discriminatory license, or b) under a license that contains 539 reasonable and non-discriminatory terms and conditions, including a 540 reasonable royalty or other payment, or c) without the need to obtain 541 a license from the IPR holder. 543 The inclusion of licensing information in IPR disclosures is not 544 mandatory but it is encouraged so that the working groups will have 545 as much information as they can during their deliberations. If the 546 inclusion of licensing information in an IPR disclosure would 547 significantly delay its submission it is quite reasonable to submit a 548 disclosure without licensing information and then submit a new 549 disclosure when the licensing information becomes available. 551 6.6 When is a disclosure required? 552 IPR disclosures under Sections 6.1.1. and 6.1.2 are required with 553 respect to IPR that is owned directly or indirectly, by the 554 individual or his/her employer or sponsor (if any) or that such 555 persons otherwise have the right to license or assert. 557 7. Failure to disclose 559 There are cases where individuals are not permitted by their 560 employers or by other factors to disclose the existence or substance 561 of patent applications or other IPR. Since disclosure is required 562 for anyone submitting documents or participating in IETF discussions, 563 a person who does not disclose IPR for this reason, or any other 564 reason, must not contribute to or participate in IETF activities with 565 respect to technologies that he or she reasonably and personally 566 knows to be Covered by IPR which he or she will not disclose. 567 Contributing to or participating in IETF discussions about a 568 technology without making required IPR disclosures is a violation of 569 IETF process. 571 8. Evaluating alternative technologies in IETF working groups 573 In general, IETF working groups prefer technologies with no known IPR 574 claims or, for technologies with claims against them, an offer of 575 royalty-free licensing. But IETF working groups have the discretion 576 to adopt technology with a commitment of fair and non-discriminatory 577 terms, or even with no licensing commitment, if they feel that this 578 technology is superior enough to alternatives with fewer IPR claims 579 or free licensing to outweigh the potential cost of the licenses. 581 Over the last few years the IETF has adopted stricter requirements 582 for some security technologies. It has become common to have a 583 mandatory-to-implement security technology in IETF technology 584 specifications. This is to ensure that there will be at least one 585 common security technology present in all implementations of such a 586 specification that can be used in all cases. This does not limit the 587 specification from including other security technologies, the use of 588 which could be negotiated between implementations. An IETF consensus 589 has developed that no mandatory-to-implement security technology can 590 be specified in an IETF specification unless it has no known IPR 591 claims against it or a royalty-free license is available to 592 implementers of the specification unless there is a very good reason 593 to do so. This limitation does not extend to other security 594 technologies in the same specification if they are not listed as 595 mandatory-to-implement. 597 It should also be noted that the absence of IPR disclosures is not 598 the same thing as the knowledge that there will be no IPR claims in 599 the future. People or organizations not currently involved in the 600 IETF or people or organizations that discover IPR they feel to be 601 relevant in their patent portfolios can make IPR disclosures at any 602 time. 604 It should also be noted that the validity and enforceability of any 605 IPR may be challenged for legitimate reasons, and the mere existence 606 of an IPR disclosure should not automatically be taken to mean that 607 the disclosed IPR is valid or enforceable. Although the IETF can 608 make no actual determination of validity, enforceability or 609 applicability of any particular IPR claim, it is reasonable that a 610 working group will take into account on their own opinions of the 611 validity, enforceability or applicability of Intellectual Property 612 Rights in their evaluation of alternative technologies. 614 9. Change control for technologies 616 The IETF must have change control over the technology described in 617 any standards track IETF Documents in order to fix problems that may 618 be discovered or to produce other derivative works. 620 In some cases the developer of patented or otherwise controlled 621 technology may decide to hand over to the IETF the right to evolve 622 the technology (a.k.a "change control"). The implementation of an 623 agreement between the IETF and the developer of the technology can be 624 complex. (See [RFC 1790] and [RFC 2339] for examples.) 626 Note that there is no inherent prohibition against a standards track 627 IETF Document making a normative reference to proprietary technology. 628 For example, a number of IETF Standards support proprietary 629 cryptographic transforms. 631 10. Licensing requirements to advance standards track IETF Documents 633 RFC 2026 Section 4.1.2 states: "If patented or otherwise controlled 634 technology is required for implementation, the separate 635 implementations must also have resulted from separate exercise of the 636 licensing process." A key word in this text is "required." The mere 637 existence of disclosed IPR does not necessarily mean that licenses 638 are actually required in order to implement the technology. Section 639 4.1 of this document should be taken to apply to the case where there 640 are multiple implementations and none of the implementers have felt 641 that they needed to license the technology and they have no plausible 642 indications that any IPR holder(s) will try to enforce their IPR. 644 11. No IPR disclosures in IETF Documents 646 IETF and RFC Editor Documents must not contain any mention of 647 specific IPR. All specific IPR disclosures must be submitted as 648 described in Section 6. Specific IPR disclosures must not be in the 649 affected IETF and RFC Editor Documents because the reader could be 650 misled. The inclusion of a particular IPR disclosure in a document 651 could be interpreted to mean that the IETF, IESG or RFC Editor has 652 formed an opinion on the validity, enforceability or applicability of 653 the IPR. The reader could also be misled to think that the included 654 IPR disclosures are the only IPR disclosures the IETF has received 655 concerning the IETF document. Readers should always refer to the on- 656 line web page to get a full list of IPR disclosures received by the 657 IETF concerning any Contribution. (http://www.ietf.org/ipr/) 659 12. Security Considerations 661 This memo relates to IETF process, not any particular technology. 662 There are security considerations when adopting any technology, 663 whether IPR-protected or not. A working group should take those 664 security considerations into account as one part of evaluating the 665 technology, just as IPR is one part, but there are no known issues of 666 security with IPR procedures. 668 13. References 670 13.1 Normative references 671 [RFC 2026] Bradner, S. (ed), "The Internet Standards Process -- 672 Revision 3", RFC 2026, October 1996 674 [RFC 2028] Hovey, R. and S. Bradner, "The Organizations Involved in 675 the IETF Standards Process", RFC 2028, October 1996 677 [RFC 2418] Bradner, S. (ed), "Working Group Guidelines and 678 Procedures", RFC 2518, September 1998 680 [IETF SUB] work in progress: draft-iprwg-submission-00.txt 682 13.2 Informative references 683 [RFC 1790] Cerf, V., "An Agreement between the Internet Society and 684 Sun Microsystems, Inc. in the Matter of ONC RPC and XDR 685 Protocols", RFC 1790, April 1995 687 [RFC 2339] IETF & Sun Microsystems, "An Agreement Between the 688 Internet Society, the IETF, and Sun Microsystems, Inc. in the 689 matter of NFS V.4 Protocols", RFC 2339, May 1998 691 14. Acknowledgements 693 The editor would like to acknowledge the help of the IETF IPR Working 694 Group and, in particular the help of Jorge Contreras of Hale and Dorr 695 for his careful legal reviews of this and other IETF IPR-related and 696 process documents. The editor would also like to thank Valerie See 697 for her extensive comments and suggestions. 699 15. Editors Address 701 Scott Bradner 702 Harvard University 703 29 Oxford St. 704 Cambridge MA, 02138 706 sob@harvard.edu +1 617 495 3864 708 16. Full copyright statement: 710 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). Except as set forth 711 below, authors retain all their rights. 713 This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to 714 others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it 715 or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published 716 and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any 717 kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are 718 included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this 719 document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing 720 the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other 721 Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of 722 developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for rights 723 in submissions defined in the Internet Standards process must be 724 followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than 725 English. 727 The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be 728 revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns. 730 This document and the information contained herein is provided on an 731 "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/S HE 732 REPRESENTS (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET 733 ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, 734 INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE 735 INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED 736 WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. 738 17. change log 740 (note to RFC Editor - remove this section prior to publication) 742 version 00 to version 01 743 sec 1 b - add "following normal processes" 744 sec 1 c - reword 745 sec 2.2.1 - add "if the contribution is an Internet-Draft" 746 sec 6 - largely reworked 747 sec 6.7 - added call for IPR with WG & IETF last calls 748 sec 7 - add "or participates in a working group discussion" .br 749 sec 8 - add "or other factors" 750 sec 14 - redo security considerations 751 sec 15 - added acknowledgements 752 sec 18 - added change log 754 version 01 to version 02 755 fix miscellaneous typos throughout document 756 swap personally and reasonably 757 change "IPR claim" to "IPR disclosure" a number of places 758 abstract - note update of rfc 2026 759 sec 1 - remove ISOC 760 sec 1(c) - reword - remove implication disclose of 3rd party IPR 761 sec 2.2.1 - reword - remove 3rd party IPR holders 762 sec 3 (C) - added royalty-free - removed "standards track" 763 remove text about implementations did not add "implicit" 764 because that is just what the IESG is doing remove "openly 765 specified" 766 sec 3.1 - added note about no licensing case 767 sec 4 - change so RFC Editor adds IPR statements tweak 4(A) 768 so 4(C) could be removed & make it generic to IETF documents 769 sec 5.1 & 5.2 - included definitions from copyright ID 770 sec 6.1.1 - last sentence - reword 771 sec 6.2.1 - append sec 6.2.3 772 sec 6.2.2 - reword 773 sec 6.3.1 - tweak wording 774 sec 6.4 - replace - add royalty-free add granted patent 775 applications 776 sec 6.5 1st pp - replace - add royalty-free remove example 777 classes 778 sec 6.6 - replace 779 sec 7 - tweak last sentence 780 sec 9 - tweak wording add security RF requirement 781 sec 14.2 - remove unneeded references 783 ver 02 to ver 03 784 many editing changes throughout document 785 generally changed "claim" to "disclosure" 786 changed the disclosure email addresses and pointed to a web site 787 for instructions 788 sec 2.2.1 A - removed detail - reference sec 6.1.1 789 remove old sec 7 790 sec 4 - added definition of covered changed other text to use 791 "covered" 792 sec 5 - changed def of cover 793 sec 6.1.1, 6.1.2 & 6.1.3 - reword 795 open questions: document process for ipr & document 796 advancement 798 ver 03 to ver 04 799 a number of wording clarifications 800 sec 6.4 2nd pp - removed note of need to state how new IPR applies 801 because that is redundant with filing a new disclosure 803 ver 04 to ver 05 804 sec 6.4 - change Internet-Draft to IETF document 806 ver 05 to ver 06 807 a number of wording clarifications 808 add ToC 809 move definitions to top of document 810 sec 1 - def of Contribution - change "meeting" to "session" 811 sec 2 - expanded definition of Covers 812 sec 6.1.1 - change "intends" to "may" 813 sec 6.4 - restructure - change "must" to "should" for disclosure 814 on abandonment 815 sec 7 - added "participating in" in a few places 816 sec 8 - changed "claim" to disclosure & added enforceability 817 sec 11 - added IESG & validity, enforceability or applicability 819 ver 06 to 07 820 fix misc typos in document 821 sec 1 - import definitions from IETF SUB 822 tweak to deal with separation between IETF & RFC Editor documents 823 (e.g. add sec 4(B)) 824 sec 4(D) tweak wording in 4(D) 2nd pp 825 sec 6.4.1 - fix typo of substance in 1st line 827 ver 07 to ver 08 828 sec 6.4.2 - redo to remove new requirements 829 sec 6.5 - add 2nd pp 831 ver 08 to ver 09 832 sec 5 - reword 1st pp 833 sec 6.1.1 - reword to remove "should" and deal with non-ID 834 contributions 835 sec 6.2.1 - add need for contribution to be in an ID 836 6.4.1 - reword to remove "should" 837 sec 6.4.2 - reword to avoid "should" 838 sec 6.5 - reword title, reword text to avoid "should" 839 sec 8 - change "should" to "can" 840 sec 11 - change "should" to "must" 842 ver 09 to ver 10 843 sec 6 - add note on participant 844 sec 6.2.1 & 6.2.2 - tweak wording 846 ver 10 to ver 11 847 misc typos, editorial tweaks & punctuation throughout document 848 sec 6.2.1 - reorder 2nd & 3rd pp and reword new 2nd pp for clarity 849 sec 6.2.2 - change "published as" to "published in"(a contribution 850 may not be an ID all by itself) - add 2nd pp 851 sec 6.4.3 - tweak wording about blanket RF disclosures 852 sec 9 - removed 2nd sentence in 1st pp, replace last pp