Re: IPR Disclosure: The Trustees of Columbia University inthe City of New York's Statement about IPRrelated to draft-ietf-nsis-tunnel-13

Calvin,

This text seems sound for the possibility that the document
moves to the Standards Track. But what about the likely
case where this remains Experimental (which is a
non-standards track status)?

>The reasonable non-discriminatory terms are:
>
>If this standard is adopted, Columbia will not assert any patents 
>owned or controlled ...

I think part of your previous disclosure covered the
*publication as Experimental* outcome. If you add that
back in, with more certainty expressed, then I'm with you.

IANAL, nor will I ever BAL,
Al


At 09:39 AM 12/19/2010, Fred Baker wrote:

>On Dec 19, 2010, at 5:05 AM, Jukka Manner wrote:
>
> > I would like to propose that we continue with the publication 
> procedure, since the statement lets anyone freely use the claimed 
> IPR for implementing the accepted, but not yet published, 
> draf-ietf-nsis-tunnel.
>
>IMHO, the new IPR statement is acceptable.
>_______________________________________________
>nsis mailing list
>[email protected]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsis