Subject: [Inquiry #37209] IETF IPR Disclosure Page

From: " via RT" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 09:41:34 -0500

Dear Jan:

Thank you for your inquiry.  The "Patent Disclosure and Licensing
Declaration Template for Notification" is intended for "third-party"
notification.  That is, it may be used to inform the IETF about patent
information related to an IETF document or contribution when the person
letting the IETF know about the patent is not related to the patent
owner.  Therefore, if you are aware of a patent or patent application
(published or unpublished) related to an IETF document or contribution,
then you may certainly use this template to submit an IPR disclosure.

The IETF is not a membership organization, and anyone who takes an
interest in, and follows the work of the IETF may be considered on some
level to be an "IETF participant."  From your message, it seems to me
that you qualify.

Since you work at the European Patent Office (EPO), I am forwarding your
note to the IETF chair and to the IPR working group.  They would be in
the best position to provide guidance and suggestions about how patent
examiners such as yourself might contribute to the IETF IPR notification
process.

Best Regards,

Barbara Fuller
Acting Executive Director
IETF     
----------------------------------------------------
> [[email-masked] - Fri Feb 11 05:29:51 2005]:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Working at the European Patrent Office (EPO) as a patent examiner in the 
> field of internet related data communication I encounter often patent 
> application for which the closest prior art is situated in the IETF 
> -drafts. It happens often that applicants for patents are the same as the 
> people filing the IETF drafts. In many of such cases there is no mention 
> of any IPR in the draft.
> While looking at the IETF IPR Disclosure Page 
> (https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/ipr_disclosure.cgi), which is in my 
> opinion a great step in the right direction dealing with the delicate 
> relationship between Standards and IPR.
> 
> When looking at the mentioed page I was wandering how we (patent 
> examiners) could contribute (taking into account the fact that European 
> Applications are only published 18 months after filing), the closest 
> possibility I thought of was to use the item " Notify the IETF of IPR 
> other than your own ". However when looking at this notification, in part 
> II, I read "Contact information for the IETF Participant Whose Personal 
> Belief Triggered this Disclosure". Does that mean that only IETF 
> Participants (authors, members of working groups, etc) can fill out
such a 
> notification form?
> 
> What would be, in your opinion,  the way (if there is one) for us patent 
> examiners to contribute?
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Jan Mannekens
> Patent Examiner - DIR1244 - Telecommunication
> European Patent Office
> e-mail: [email-masked]
> tel: +31-703401965
> 
> 

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

---

From: "todd glassey" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 08:09:26 -0800

Barbara  -
----- Original Message ----- 
From: " via RT" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>
Sent: Friday, February 11, 2005 6:41 AM
Subject: [Inquiry #37209] IETF IPR Disclosure Page

> then you may certainly use this template to submit an IPR disclosure.

But its a voluntary process... right?

>
> The IETF is not a membership organization,

YES it is. It just outsources the maintanence of the participants and
members to the mailing list management. That way it can offset the
operations costs as much as possible. This outsourcing of the mailing lists
and that there is a formal periodic meeting of the membership, for which
there is a formal charge and which is announced and managed through those
same mailing lists ties this all into a nice little package.

> and anyone who takes an
> level to be an "IETF participant."

Right - the membership is Open To All on paper, but that also is not quite
the case. The WG's and their IP management processes as well as their
porfolio management processes fail (no refuse) to take into account even
basic IP release processes. The IETF further claims in its paper
descriptions of itself, to be a open process wherein anyone can have access
to a standards process. This turns out to be exactly untrue. Only those that
invest in the operations of a WG have this access, and there is a
fundamental cost to it that is unspoken in the public but a part of most
particpants budget - that being "Standards Development Fees".

> From your message, it seems to me
> that you qualify.
>

No - If the US and Global PTO's are not to be implemented, then no others
should as well. Just my two cents.