Subject: If there is no exclusive conveyance agreement then who owns the delta between when an idea was submitted as a ID and when it becones a RFC?

From: "todd glassey" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 15:49:39 -0800

The IETF's Process itself makes several things of concern and they are:

    1)     The IETF doesn't ever publish works of any submitter as they sit
without reviewing them for compliance with the IETF's packaging requirements
for I-D's.

>From my understanding of contract law this may be an issue since it means
that the IETF interferes with all of its proposed initiatives. Seems to me
that the Editors by the very definition of the I-D, that it is a proposed
effort and as such an exploratory document, and that as such they cannot
molest or modify any of the content of the proposed draft except as
necessary to make the draft compliant to legal or style requirements for
publication. But that's it - the IETF has nothing to say about what is and
is not submitted ass an I-D and if it does that it possibly tortuously
interferes with the submissions and as such the standards process - this is
the real lawsuit I would be worried about.

Anyway, in this process where the document is reviewed and then changed by
the Editors, this may mean that the Submitter's work being modified the
output is a new derivative at some level. If the work the Editor's do is NOT
content related and only formatting to force alignment with the packaging
standards for I-D's and follow-on documents,  then the Submitter probably
continues to own the work through the publishing of the I-D.

    2)    When dialog and brain-storming or 'vetting' as it is referred to
is commenced on the open list, the 'suggestions' or reviews, or negotiated
changes all represent separate IP from that of the original work(s) and
whether they are captured in the IETF presentation documents (the proposed
RFC or BCP documents). That work although stemming from the core genesis of
the initial publication is a derivative of that initial genesis and is
controllable as a derivative of that preceding work.

The question is who then owns the rights to produce the protocol... and
possibly patent it?

    3)    The RFC then also is reviewed and possibly modified by the WG
members and as such it then would be yet another derivative in a change of
ever-morphing IP.

And again here we have the same question, who then owns the rights to
produce the protocol... and possibly patent it?

    4)    The IESG also get their whack at the process and so now there are
no fewer than four reasonable sources of genesis and derivative rights to
address.

And with yet another derivative, the question is who then owns the rights to
produce the protocol... and possibly patent it? It clearly cannot be the
submitter - they have no exclusive contribution or assignment of rights from
any other parties so everyone still owns their own works...

So in closing this - the IETF claims that the Submitter owns the IP
throughout the whole process and that clearly ISNT true. At least by how the
release work and have worked IMHO.

T.

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

---

From: "todd glassey" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 17:43:59 -0800

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "todd glassey" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 3:49 PM
Subject: If there is no exclusive conveyance agreement then who owns
thedelta between when an idea was submitted as a ID and when itbecones a
RFC?

> is not submitted ass

oops - the dyslexic me... - should be "as"

> an I-D and if it does that it possibly tortuously