recourse if our rules are violated?

["Steven M. Bellovin" <smb at cs.columbia.edu>]

The IETF chair, Russ Housley, would like the opinion of the IPR WG on
what to do when an IPR disclosure occurs belatedly.  There are three
cases I can see:

	(a) Intentional non-disclosure

	(b) Unintentional non-disclosure (which appears to be the case
	in the situation currently under discussion on the IETF mailing
	list)

	(c) Third-party patents that were not known to the WG or the
	IETF when the document was adopted.

Our focus thus far has been on (a), and our attitude has been "let the
government(s) take action" (see, for example, the Rambus case
( http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1161606920964 ) and the Dell
case ( http://www.ftc.gov/opa/1995/11/dell.htm ).  We've traditionally
assumed there was nothing we could do about (c), since such patents
could appear at any time

The questions, then, are these:

	Should the IETF have a formal policy?  Alternatively, should we
	leave it to the IESG's judgment?

	If we do have a formal policy, what should it be?

	Should it be expressed in an RFC or an ION?


		--Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb

_______________________________________________
Ipr-wg mailing list
Ipr-wg at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg