Subject: RE: Feedback on guidelines-03 draft

From: "Allen Lo" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 18:04:20 -0700

9. Section 5.6 - the reciprocity paragraph. Scott, the "general
> reciprocity" definition as written here somehow appears to have gotten
> somewhat confused with a different concept - that of "defensive
> suspension". As I understand this, "universal reciprocity" is similar
> to bilateral reciprocity, except that instead of the licensee only
> having to commit to license its own patent claims to the licensor, it
> instead has to license all potential implementers who come asking.  I
> think what this means to your text is that the sentence beginning with
> "A 'general' or 'universal' reciprocity...." would change to "A
> 'general' or 'univeral' reciprocity restriction is also possible,
> under which the IPR claimant makes its patented technology available
> to a licensee as long as the licensee commits to allow all other
> implementers of the same IETF standard (not just the IPR claimant) to
> use the licensee's own patented technology covering the standard under
> comparable terms."

Question to everyone: have you ever seen licensing terms like this,
where you can use my technology as long as you license your related
technology to everyone (not just me)?  The only thing I can think of
that's related would be the GPL.

RB: I have never seen this at a standards body. I have seen it in some
consortiums, where an agreement among the parties covers all IPR issues.

AL: I have not seen this either.  I believe what is in your draft is
fairly common (i.e., my RF license is conditioned on you not suing for
infringement on any of your patents).

_______________________________________________
Ipr-wg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg
_______________________________________________
Ipr-wg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg