Subject: TIFF use within ITU standards / Out of scope

From: Scott Foshee <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 20:53:49 -0700

Please circulate to ITU management.

Dear Gentlemen,

I am the person at Adobe responsible for TIFF.  It has come to my 
attention that rather than using finalized IETF specifications for 
your TIFF based standards, the ITU publication (T.37) of the set of 
standards commonly referred to as TIFF FX (RFC 2301) preceded the 
IETF's final publication. Unfortunately, I must inform you that TIFF 
FX, as defined by the IETF in RFC 2301 and in ITU T.37, is outside 
the scope of the license grant provided both to the ITU and the IETF 
in the fall of 1997.  Other ITU efforts may also be affected.

Adobe has communicated ongoing concerns in this area to the IETF 
editors/Xerox since the Spring of 1998.  The Editors continued 
progressing the document despite Adobe objections, thus Adobe 
formally notified IETF management in December 2000 and the issue was 
elevated to the IETF's IAB in March of 2001.  It was Adobe's 
understanding from the IETF editors that the ITU was basing its work 
on the IETF's work and that communication with them was sufficient. 
This issue is currently being considered by the IETF Internet Fax 
working group and has yet to be resolved.

Since the IETF standard and any adoption/implementation of TIFF 
FX--including ITU standards based on TIFF FX--is out of scope of 
Adobe's 1997 license grant, please rescind publication of the 
standards based upon RFC 2301 until these standards are brought 
within the scope of Adobe's license.  This would include T.37 and 
other TIFF FX based efforts.

Adobe understands  that the IETF specifically declines to take a 
stance on IP use in its standards and thus defers decisions on the IP 
status of technology in its standards to the members of its working 
groups and those who choose to adopt/implement their technology, and 
whatever internal processes these companies/organizations have for 
evaluating the IP of technology they choose to include in their 
products or support in standards. Thus, the ITU's mere use of IETF 
standards does not imply compliance with an Adobe TIFF license.

Finally, please notify SG16 and other affected parties.  Since Adobe 
is a supplier of copyrighted work to the ITU under license and not a 
participant in the working group, it is not apparent how we may 
contact the various participants and parties directly.

I am confident that Adobe can reach an agreement with those wishing 
to make use of TIFF in the development and use of TIFF FX.  For 
instance, at the IETF's request, Adobe has provided a means whereby 
third parties may submit candidate extensions to TIFF that-if 
approved-would bring TIFF FX within the scope of Adobe's existing 
license grant. Adobe does not have the IP rights to include these 
extensions unilaterally.  And this mechanism has yet to be utilized. 
Further, Adobe has participated in recent IETF interoperability 
discussions that may result in splitting TIFF FX into two standards: 
one with existing interoperability that can be progressed rapidly and 
has the side effect of being in scope of the Adobe license, and one 
that lacks both interoperability and being in-scope of Adobe's 
license. This would imply deferring publication/adoption of the 
latter parts. Other options are certainly possible.

I am committed to work with the groups involved to explore these and 
other options.

Sincerely,

Scott Foshee

---

From: John C Klensin <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2001 07:09:26 -0400

Scott,

I note only that this note is inconsistent with your previous
discussions with us on this topic in at least two respects:

(i) When the issue of the ITU documents has been raised with
you, you have indicated that you did not see any license
violation there.

(ii) When asked about Adobe policies and relationships, you have
repeated informed us that your opinions and statements are
informal, and do not represent or commit Adobe and its policies.
This note certainly reads like an Adobe policy statement.

I trust that the concern here is clear: independent of any
ambiguities in where we stand today, there is clear consensus
among almost everyone who has participated in, or otherwise been
significantly involved with, the Working Group that the features
to which Adobe now takes exception were incorporated based on a
good-faith understanding of suggestions and allocations made by
an Adobe participant and officer.  Whatever decisions are made
going forward --by either the IETF or the ITU-- should be based
on a clear and consistent statement of Adobe's position, one
that unambiguously represents a corporate position.

regards,
   John C Klensin
   Chair, IAB

--On Tuesday, 02 October, 2001 20:53 -0700 Scott Foshee
<[email-masked]> wrote:

> I am the person at Adobe responsible for TIFF.  It has come to
> my attention that rather than using finalized IETF
> specifications for your TIFF based standards, the ITU
> publication (T.37) of the set of standards commonly referred
> to as TIFF FX (RFC 2301) preceded the IETF's final
> publication. Unfortunately, I must inform you that TIFF FX, as
> defined by the IETF in RFC 2301 and in ITU T.37, is outside
> the scope of the license grant provided both to the ITU and
> the IETF in the fall of 1997.  Other ITU efforts may also be
> affected.
> 
> Adobe has communicated ongoing concerns in this area to the
> IETF editors/Xerox since the Spring of 1998.  The Editors
> continued progressing the document despite Adobe objections,
> thus Adobe formally notified IETF management in December 2000
> and the issue was elevated to the IETF's IAB in March of 2001.
> It was Adobe's understanding from the IETF editors that the
> ITU was basing its work on the IETF's work and that
> communication with them was sufficient. This issue is
> currently being considered by the IETF Internet Fax working
> group and has yet to be resolved.
> 
> Since the IETF standard and any adoption/implementation of
> TIFF FX--including ITU standards based on TIFF FX--is out of
> scope of Adobe's 1997 license grant, please rescind
> publication of the standards based upon RFC 2301 until these
> standards are brought within the scope of Adobe's license.
> This would include T.37 and other TIFF FX based efforts.
> 
> Adobe understands  that the IETF specifically declines to take
> a stance on IP use in its standards and thus defers decisions
> on the IP status of technology in its standards to the members
> of its working groups and those who choose to adopt/implement
> their technology, and whatever internal processes these
> companies/organizations have for evaluating the IP of
> technology they choose to include in their products or support
> in standards. Thus, the ITU's mere use of IETF standards does
> not imply compliance with an Adobe TIFF license.
> 
> Finally, please notify SG16 and other affected parties.  Since
> Adobe is a supplier of copyrighted work to the ITU under
> license and not a participant in the working group, it is not
> apparent how we may contact the various participants and
> parties directly.
> 
> I am confident that Adobe can reach an agreement with those
> wishing to make use of TIFF in the development and use of TIFF
> FX.  For instance, at the IETF's request, Adobe has provided a
> means whereby third parties may submit candidate extensions to
> TIFF that-if approved-would bring TIFF FX within the scope of
> Adobe's existing license grant. Adobe does not have the IP
> rights to include these extensions unilaterally.  And this
> mechanism has yet to be utilized. Further, Adobe has
> participated in recent IETF interoperability discussions that
> may result in splitting TIFF FX into two standards: one with
> existing interoperability that can be progressed rapidly and
> has the side effect of being in scope of the Adobe license,
> and one that lacks both interoperability and being in-scope of
> Adobe's license. This would imply deferring
> publication/adoption of the latter parts. Other options are
> certainly possible.
> 
> I am committed to work with the groups involved to explore
> these and other options.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Scott Foshee
>

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2001 07:17:48 -0700

At 08:53 PM 10/2/2001, Scott Foshee wrote:
>  Unfortunately, I must inform you that TIFF FX, as defined by the IETF in 
> RFC 2301 and in ITU T.37, is outside the scope of the license grant 
> provided both to the ITU and the IETF in the fall of 1997.

Scott,

Please clarify the details of the "violation", given:

         <http://www.imc.org/ietf-fax/mail-archive/msg04004.html>

in which there is a specific response to your specific claims.

It is odd that you have not yet responded to that note, given that Adobe 
should desire a clear, public understanding of the problem.

d/

----------
Dave Crocker  <mailto:[email-masked]>
Brandenburg InternetWorking  <http://www.brandenburg.com>
tel +1.408.246.8253;  fax +1.408.273.6464