Re: [Geopriv] IPR on geopriv-arch
"Richard L. Barnes" <[email protected]> Fri, 15 Oct 2010 11:17:46 -0400
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.ipr,gmane.ietf.geopriv |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Todd, General comments about IETF IPR policies are not appropriate for this list. If you want to challenge those policies, please forward these comments to the IETF list. --Richard On Oct 15, 2010, at 11:12 AM, todd glassey wrote: > On 10/13/2010 4:52 PM, Carl Reed wrote: >> s and 1980's. Further, much of the early work in the OGC - such as in >> web mapping - predates by at least a couple of years most of the web >> mapping related patents > > The real issue is the outgoing license which does not mandate that > each > adopter MUST (and I means that 'must' in caps) do formal diligence on > their use of these IP's because the IETF cannot give anyone license to > directly or indirectly assign, use, reproduce or convey any rights > pertaining to the underlying Intellectual Properties that are > described > in the IETF Publications referred to as Internet Drafts and other > public > documents they produce. > > Further the IETF's Copyright ss107 rights only pertain to actions in > furtherance of the IETF's research meaning "ANY USE OF THEIR IP > WHICH IS > REPRODUCED IN ANY FORM IS ALSO CONSTRAINED BY NOTEWELL AND THE IETF > PROCESSES SINCE THE ONLY POSSIBLE USE OF COPYRIGHT ACT SECTION 107 USE > OF RESEARCH-EXEMPTIONS MUST TAKE PLACE WITHIN THAT FORMAL FRAMEWORK > THAT > THE IP WAS INITIALLY PUBLISHED IN OR IT WILL CONSTITUTE PRIVATE USE TO > FURTHER A COMMERCIAL ENDEAVOR WHETHER THAT ENDEAVOR IS ACADEMIC IN > FORM > OR IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR TOTALLY. > > What I find interesting is that any IDIOT who reads the copyright act > would get that. So it means that the NOTEWELL practice as its sits is > legally broken - the question is whether the management of the IETF > has > potential liability for this stupidity in its process-design is not > something I want to touch on here. > > So this all boils down to > > 1) Whether the IETF's and OGC are functionally licensing technology to > people which is already protected by existing IP protections or not. > > 2) Whether the SDG's reliance on (c) section 107 is an issue for > anyone > republishing those documents with copyrighted content from others in > them since the IETF is allowing parties to use its documents for any > and > all purposes outside of the IETF's standards process by functionally > ignoring these issues. > > > Personally I think these are real issues for the IETF but that's > just my > two cents. > > Todd Glassey > > -- > //----------------------------------------------------------------- > > > This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. > If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the > addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose or take any action based > on this message or any information herein. If you have received this > message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail > and delete this message. > > Thank you for your cooperation. > > _______________________________________________ > Geopriv mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv