view Side-By-Side changes
Network Working Group S. Bradner
Internet-Draft Harvard U.
Editor
April
May 2003
Intellectual Property Rights in IETF Technology
<draft-ietf-ipr-technology-rights-05.txt>
<draft-ietf-ipr-technology-rights-06.txt>
Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft and is subject to all provisions
of Section 10 of RFC 2026.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
Abstract
The IETF policies about intellectual property rights Intellectual Property Rights (IPR), such as
patent rights, relative to technologies developed in the IETF are
designed to ensure that IETF working groups and participants have as
much information about any IPR constraints on a technical proposal as
possible. The policies are also intended to benefit the Internet
community and the public at large, while respecting the legitimate
rights of IPR holders. This memo details the IETF policies
concerning IPR related to technology worked on within the IETF. It
also describes the objectives that the policies are designed to meet.
This memo updates RFC 2026 and, with RFC XXXY, replaces Section 10 of
RFC 2026. [note to RFC editor - replace XXXY with number of IETF
SUB]
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003)
1. Introduction
Table of Contents
Bradner [Page 1]
Internet-Draft IP in IETF Technology April May 2003
In the years since RFC 2026 was published there have been a number of
times when the exact intent of Section 10, the section which deals
with IPR disclosures has been the subject
Status of vigorous debate within this Memo.................................................1
Abstract............................................................1
1. Definitions ....................................................1
2. Introduction....................................................1
3. Contributions to the IETF.......................................1
2.1 General Policy...............................................1
2.2 Rights and Permissions.......................................1
4. IETF community. This is because it is becoming increasingly
common for IETF working groups to have to deal with claims Actions....................................................1
3.1 No Determination of
intellectual property rights (IPR), such as patent rights, with
regards Reasonable and Non-discriminatory Terms...1
5. Notice to technology under discussion be included in working groups. RFCs..................................1
6. IPR Disclosures.................................................1
6.1 Who must make an IPR disclosure?.............................1
6.2 The aim timing of
this ID is to clarify various ambiguities providing disclosure...........................1
6.3 How must a disclosure be made?...............................1
6.4 What must be in Section 10 of [RFC 2026]
that led to these debates and to amplify the policy a disclosure?................................1
6.5 What licensing information must be detailed in order a disclosure?..1
6.6 Interest in IPR mandating disclosures........................1
7. Failure to
clarify what the provide notice.......................................1
8. Evaluating alternative technologies in IETF is, or should be, doing. working groups......1
9. Change control for technologies.................................1
10. Licensing requirements to advance standards track documents.....1
11. No IPR disclosures can come at any point in the IETF process, e.g.,
before documents............................1
12. Security Considerations.........................................1
13. References......................................................1
13.1 Normative References.........................................1
13.2 Informative References.......................................1
14. Acknowledgements................................................1
15. Editors Address.................................................1
16. Full copyright statement........................................1
1. Definitions
"Contribution": in the first Internet-Draft has been submitted, prior context of this document, a Contribution to RFC
publication, or after
the IETF is any submission intended by the Contributor for
publication as an Internet-Draft, RFC has been published and or any statements made
within the working group
has been closed down; they can come from people submitting technical
proposals context of an IETF process. Such statements include
oral statements in IETF meetings, as Internet-Drafts, on mailing lists or well as written and
electronic communications made at meetings, from
other people participating in any time or place, which are
addressed to
o the IETF plenary session,
o any IETF working group or from third parties
who find out that portion thereof,
o the work is going or has gone on; and they can be
based on granted patents IESG, or any member thereof on patent applications, and in some cases
be disingenuous, i.e., made to affect the standards process rather
than to inform.
RFC 2026 section 10 established three basic principles regarding the
IETF dealing with claims behalf of intellectual property rights:
(a) the IETF will make no determination about IESG,
o the validity of IAB, or any
particular IPR claim
(b) member thereof on behalf of the IAB,
o any IETF following normal processes can decide to use technology
for which IPR disclosures have been made if it decides that such a
use is warranted
(c) in order for mailing list, including the IETF list itself, any
working group and or design team list, or any other list
functioning under IETF auspices,
o the rest of RFC Editor or the Internet-Drafts function
Bradner [Page 2]
Internet-Draft IP in IETF Technology May 2003
Statements made outside of an IETF meeting, mailing list or other
function, that are clearly not intended to have
the information needed be input to make an informed decision about IETF
activity, group, or function, are not considered to be
Contributions in the use context of a this document.
"Contributors": individuals submitting Contributions
"IETF Document": RFCs and Internet-Drafts.
"IPR" or "Intellectual Property Rights": means patent, copyright,
utility, model, invention registration, database and data rights
that may Cover an Implementing Technology, whether such rights
arise from a registration or renewal thereof, or an application
therefore, in each case anywhere in the world.
"Implementing Technology": means a technology that implements an IETF
specification or standard.
"Reasonably and personally known": means something an individual
knows personally or, because of the job the individual holds,
would reasonably be expected to know. This wording is used to
indicate that an organization cannot purposely keep an individual
in the dark about patents or patent applications just to avoid the
disclosure requirement. But this requirement should not be
interpreted as requiring the IETF Contributor or participant (or
his or her represented organization, if any) to perform a patent
search to find applicable IPR.
"Covers" or "Covered" mean that a valid claim of a patent or a patent
application in any jurisdiction or a protected claim, or any other
Intellectual Property Right, would necessarily be infringed by the
exercise of a right (e.g., making, using, selling, importing,
distribution, copying, etc) with respect to an Implementing
Technology. For purposes of this definition, "valid claim" means
a claim of any unexpired patent or patent application which shall
not have been withdrawn, cancelled or disclaimed, nor held invalid
by a court of competent jurisdiction in an unappealed or
unappealable decision.
2. Introduction
In the years since RFC 2026 was published there have been a number of
times when the exact intent of Section 10, the section which deals
with IPR disclosures has been the subject of vigorous debate within
the IETF community. This is because it is becoming increasingly
common for IETF working groups to have to deal with claims of
Intellectual Property Rights (IPR), such as patent rights, with
regards to technology under discussion in working groups. The aim of
Bradner [Page 3]
Internet-Draft IP in IETF Technology May 2003
this document is to clarify various ambiguities in Section 10 of [RFC
2026] that led to these debates and to amplify the policy in order to
clarify what the IETF is, or should be, doing.
IPR disclosures can come at any point in the IETF process, e.g.,
before the first Internet-Draft has been submitted, prior to RFC
publication, or after an RFC has been published and the working group
has been closed down; they can come from people submitting technical
proposals as Internet-Drafts, on mailing lists or at meetings, from
other people participating in the working group or from third parties
who find out that the work is going or has gone on; and they can be
based on granted patents or on patent applications, and in some cases
be disingenuous, i.e., made to affect the standards process rather
than to inform.
RFC 2026 Section 10 established three basic principles regarding the
IETF dealing with claims of Intellectual Property Rights:
(a) the IETF will make no determination about the validity of any
particular IPR claim
(b) the IETF following normal processes can decide to use technology
for which IPR disclosures have been made if it decides that such a
use is warranted
(c) in order for the working group and the rest of the IETF to have
the information needed to make an informed decision about the use
of a particular technology, all those contributing to the working
group's discussions must disclose the existence of any IPR claim
that covers the
Contributor believes Covers or may ultimately Cover the technology
under discussion. This applies to both contributors and other
participants, and applies whether they contribute in person, via
email or by other means. The requirement covers applies to all IPR of
the contributor, Contributor, the contributor's Contributor's employer, sponsor, or others
represented by the contributors, Contributors, that is reasonably and personally
known to the person submitting the disclosure. No patent search
is required.
Sections 2, 3 and 3, 4 and 5 of this document address the intellectual
property issues previously covered addressed by Section 10 of RFC 2026.
Section 5 1 defines the terms used in this document, and sections 6
thru 12 then explain the rationale for these provisions, including
some of the clarifications that have been made since the adoption of
RFC 2026. The rules and procedures set out in this document are not
Bradner [Page 2]
Internet-Draft IP in IETF Technology April 2003 document are not
intended to modify or alter the IETF's current policy toward IPR in
the context of the IETF standards process. They are intended to
clarify and fill in procedural gaps.
A companion document [IETF SUB] deals with rights (such as copyrights
and trademarks) in the documents that are submitted to the IETF,
including the right of IETF and its participants to publish and
create derivative works of those documents. This document is not
intended to address those issues.
This document is not intended as legal advice. Readers are advised
to consult their own legal advisors if they would like a legal
interpretation of their rights or the rights of the IETF in any
contributions they make.
2. Contributions in the IETF
2.1. General Policy
In all matters of intellectual property rights, the intent is to
benefit the Internet community and the public at large, while
respecting the legitimate rights of others.
2.2. Rights and Permissions
2.2.1. All Contributions
By submission of a Contribution, each person actually submitting the
Contribution, and each named co-contributor, is deemed to agree to
the following terms and conditions, on his or her own behalf, and on
behalf of the organizations the contributor represents (if any) when
submitting the Contribution.
A. The Contributor represents that he or she has made all disclosures
required by Section 6.1.1 of this document.
B. The Contributor represents that there are no limits to the
Contributor's ability to make the grants, acknowledgments and
agreements herein that are personally and reasonably known to the
Contributor.
C. If the contribution is an Internet-Draft this agreement must be
acknowledged, by including in the "Status of this Memo" section on
the first page of the contribution, one of the statements in
Section 3.2 of [IETF SUB].
3. IETF Actions
(A) When any intellectual property is disclosed, with respect the documents that are submitted to any the IETF,
Bradner [Page 3] 4]
Internet-Draft IP in IETF Technology April May 2003
technology, specification, or standard described in an IETF
document in
including the manner set forth in sec 6 right of this document, the
IESG shall require that the IETF and its participants to publish and
create derivative works of those documents. This document has is not
intended to address those issues.
This document is not intended as legal advice. Readers are advised
to consult their own legal advisors if they would like a note indicating the
existence of such claimed intellectual property rights.
(B) The IESG disclaims any responsibility for identifying the
existence legal
interpretation of their rights or for evaluating the applicability rights of any IPR,
disclosed or otherwise, to any IETF technology, specification or
standard, and will take no position on the validity or scope of IETF in any such intellectual property claims.
(C) Where intellectual property rights have been disclosed as
provided
contributions they make.
3. Contributions in Section 6 of this document, the IETF Executive
Director shall request from the discloser of such rights, a
written assurance that upon approval by the IESG for publication
as RFCs
3.1. General Policy
In all matters of Intellectual Property Rights, the relevant IETF specification(s), all persons will be
able intent is to obtain
benefit the right to implement, use, distribute Internet community and
exercise other rights with respect to Implementing Technology
under one of the licensing options specified in section 6.5 below
unless such a statement has already been submitted. The working
group proposing the use of the technology with respect to which
the intellectual property rights are disclosed may assist public at large, while
respecting the IETF
Executive Director in this effort.
The results legitimate rights of this procedure shall not, in themselves, block
advancement others.
3.2. Rights and Permissions
3.2.1. All Contributions
By submission of a specification or document along Contribution, each person actually submitting the standards
track. A working group may take into consideration
Contribution, and each named co-Contributor, is deemed to agree to
the results following terms and conditions, on his or her own behalf, and on
behalf of
this procedure in evaluating the technology, and organizations the IESG may
defer approval Contributor represents (if any) when a delay may facilitate obtaining such
assurances. The results will, however, be recorded by
submitting the IETF
Executive Director, and be Contribution.
A. The Contributor represents that he or she has made available online.
3.1 No Determination all disclosures
required by Section 6.1.1 of Reasonable and Non-discriminatory Terms this document.
B. The IESG will not make any explicit determination Contributor represents that there are no limits to the assurance
of reasonable
Contributor's ability to make the grants, acknowledgments and non-discriminatory terms for
agreements herein that are reasonably and personally known to the use of
Contributor.
C. If the Contribution is an
Implementing Technology has been fulfilled Internet-Draft this agreement must be
acknowledged, by including in practice. It will
instead apply the normal requirements for "Status of this Memo" section on
the advancement first page of Internet
Standards. If the two unrelated implementations Contribution, one of the specification
that are required to advance from Proposed Standard statements in
Section 3.2 of [IETF SUB].
4. IETF Actions
(A) When any Intellectual Property Right is disclosed, with respect
to Draft Standard
have been produced by different organizations or individuals, any technology, specification, or if standard described in an IETF
document in the "significant implementation and successful operational
experience" required to advance from Draft Standard to Standard has
been achieved, manner set forth in Section 6 of this document,
the IESG will presume shall require that the terms are reasonable
and to some degree non-discriminatory. Note that this also covers document has a note indicating the case where multiple implementers have concluded that no licensing
is required. This presumption may be challenged at
existence of such claimed Intellectual Property Rights.
(B) The IESG disclaims any time,
including during the Last-Call period by sending email to responsibility for identifying the IESG.
Bradner [Page 4] 5]
Internet-Draft IP in IETF Technology April May 2003
4. Notice to be included in RFCs
The following notice will be added by the RFC Editor to all standards
track RFCs and to all other RFCs
existence of or for which an IPR disclosure has been
received.
Disclaimer evaluating the applicability of validity:
"The any IPR,
disclosed or otherwise, to any IETF takes technology, specification or
standard, and will take no position regarding on the validity or scope of
any
intellectual property or other rights such IPR claims.
(C) Where Intellectual Property Rights have been disclosed as
provided in Section 6 of this document, the IETF Executive
Director shall request from the discloser of such IPR, a written
assurance that might upon approval by the IESG for publication as RFCs
of the relevant IETF specification(s), all persons will be claimed able to
pertain
obtain the right to implement, use, distribute and exercise other
rights with respect to Implementing Technology under one of the
licensing options specified in Section 6.5 below unless such a
statement has already been submitted. The working group proposing
the implementation or use of the technology described
in this document or the extent to which any license under such
rights might or might not be available; nor does it represent that
it has made any independent effort to identify any such rights.
Information on the IETF's procedures with respect to rights in which the Intellectual
Property Rights are disclosed may assist the IETF documents can be found Executive
Director in RFC XX and RFC XY. [note to RFC
Editor - replace XX with the number this effort.
The results of this document and replace
XY with number procedure shall not, in themselves, block
advancement of a specification or IETF SUB.]
Copies Document along the
standards track. A working group may take into consideration the
results of IPR disclosures made to this procedure in evaluating the technology, and the
IESG may defer approval when a delay may facilitate obtaining such
assurances. The results will, however, be recorded by the IETF Secretariat
Executive Director, and any
assurances of licenses to be made available, or available online.
4.1 No Determination of Reasonable and Non-discriminatory Terms
The IESG will not make any explicit determination that the result assurance
of an
attempt made to obtain a general license reasonable and non-discriminatory terms or permission any other terms for the
use of such proprietary rights by implementers or users an Implementing Technology has been fulfilled in practice. It
will instead apply the normal requirements for the advancement of this
specification can be obtained from
Internet Standards. If the IETF on-line IPR repository
at http://www.ietf.org/ipr/.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention
any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other
proprietary rights that may cover technology two unrelated implementations of the
specification that may be are required to implement this standard. Please address advance from Proposed Standard to
Draft Standard have been produced by different organizations or
individuals, or if the information "significant implementation and successful
operational experience" required to advance from Draft Standard to
Standard has been achieved, the
IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org."
5. Definitions
"Contribution": in IESG will presume that the context of terms are
reasonable and to some degree non- discriminatory. Note that this document, a contribution
also applies to the IETF case where multiple implementers have concluded
that no licensing is required. This presumption may be challenged at
any submission intended by time, including during the contributor for
publication as an Internet-Draft, RFC or any statements made
within Last-Call period by sending email to
the context of an IETF process. Such statements include
oral statements IESG.
5. Notice to be included in IETF meetings, as well as written RFCs
The following notice will be added by the RFC Editor to all standards
track RFCs and
electronic communications made at any time or place, which are
addressed to
o the IETF plenary session,
o any IETF working group or portion thereof,
o the IESG, or any member thereof on behalf of the IESG,
o the IAB or any member thereof on behalf of the IAB,
o any IETF mailing list, including the IETF list itself, any
working group or design team list, or any all other list
functioning under IETF auspices, RFCs for which an IPR disclosure has been
Bradner [Page 5] 6]
Internet-Draft IP in IETF Technology April May 2003
o
received.
Disclaimer of validity:
"The IETF takes no position regarding the RFC Editor validity or the Internet-Drafts function
Statements made outside scope of an IETF meeting, mailing list any
Intellectual Property Rights or other
function, rights that are clearly not intended to might be input claimed
to an IETF
activity, group, or function, are not considered pertain to be
Contributions in the context implementation or use of the technology
described in this document.
"Contributors": individuals submitting Contributions
"IETF Document": RFCs and Internet-Drafts.
"IPR" document or "intellectual property rights": means patent, copyright,
utility, model, invention registration, database and data rights
may Cover an Implementing Technology, whether the extent to which any license
under such rights arise
from a registration or renewal thereof, might or an application
therefore, might not be available; nor does it
represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any
such rights. Information on the IETF's procedures with respect to
rights in each case anywhere IETF Documents can be found in RFC XX and RFC XY.
[note to RFC Editor - replace XX with the world.
"Implementing Technology": means a technology that implements an IETF
specification or standard.
"Reasonably number of this document
and personally known": means something an individual
knows personally or, because replace XY with number of the job the individual holds,
would reasonably be expected to know. This wording is used IETF SUB.]
Copies of IPR disclosures made to
indicate that an organization cannot purposely keep an individual
in the dark about patents IETF Secretariat and any
assurances of licenses to be made available, or patent applications just the result of an
attempt made to avoid obtain a general license or permission for the
disclosure requirement. But use
of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this requirement should not be
interpreted as requiring
specification can be obtained from the IETF Contributor or participant (or
his or her represented organization, if any) on-line IPR repository
at http://www.ietf.org/ipr/.
The IETF invites any interested party to perform a patent
search bring to find applicable IPR.
"Covers" or "Covered" mean that a valid claim of a patent or a patent
application in its attention
any jurisdiction copyrights, patents or a protected claim, patent applications, or any other
intellectual property right, would necessarily
proprietary rights that may cover technology that may be infringed by required
to implement this standard. Please address the
exercise of a right (e.g., making, using, selling, importing,
distribution, copying, etc) with respect information to an Implementing
Technology. the
IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org."
6. IPR Disclosures
This section discusses aspects of obligations associated with IPR
disclosure.
6.1 Who must make an IPR disclosure?
6.1.1 A Contributor's IPR in his or her Contribution
Any Contributor who reasonably and personally knows of IPR meeting
the conditions of Section 6.6 which the Contributor believes Covers
or may ultimately Cover his or her Contribution, or which the
Bradner [Page 6]
Internet-Draft IP in IETF Technology April 2003
Contributor reasonably and personally knows his or her employer or
sponsor intends to enforce against Implementing Technologies based on
such Contribution, must make a disclosure in accordance with this
Section 6.
This requirement specifically includes Contributions that are made by
any means including electronic or spoken comments. An IPR disclosure
should also be made withdrawn if a revised Contribution negates a previous IPR
disclosure, and should be amended if a revised Contribution
Bradner [Page 7]
Internet-Draft IP in IETF Technology May 2003
substantially alters a previous IPR disclosure.
Contributors must disclose IPR meeting the description in this
section; there are no exceptions to this rule.
6.1.2. An IETF Participant's participant's IPR in Contributions by others
Any individual participating in an IETF discussion who reasonably and
personally knows of IPR meeting the conditions of Section 6.6 which
the individual believes Covers or may ultimately Cover a Contribution
made by another person, or which such IETF participant reasonably and
personally knows his or her employer or sponsor intends to assert
against Implementing Technologies based on such Contribution, must
make a disclosure in accordance with this Section 6.
6.1.3. IPR of Others others
If a person has information about IPR that may cover Cover IETF
Contributions, and such IPR does not meet the requirements conditions of Section
6.6 as to such person, such persons are person is encouraged to notify the IETF
by sending an email message to ietf-ipr@ietf.org. Such a notice
should be sent as soon as possible after the person realizes the
connection.
6.2. The timing of providing disclosure
Timely IPR disclosure is important because working groups need to
have as much information as they can while they are evaluating
alternative solutions.
6.2.1 Timing of disclosure under section Section 6.1.1
The Contributor or his or her employer or sponsor (if any) or other
organization holding the rights to IPR, must submit an IPR disclosure
as soon as reasonably possible after the Contribution is made unless
there is already an IETF IPR disclosure by such person(s) on file
that covers relates to the Contribution. For example, if the Contribution
is an update to a Contribution for which an IPR disclosure has
already been made and the applicability of the disclosure is not
changed by the new Contribution, then no new disclosure is required.
But if the Contribution is a new one, or is one that changes an
existing Contribution such that the revised Contribution is no longer
Covered by the disclosed IPR or would be Covered by new or different
IPR, then a disclosure must be made.
Bradner [Page 7]
Internet-Draft IP in IETF Technology April 2003
If a Contributor learns of IPR claims that meet meets the requirements conditions of
section Section
6.6, for example a new patent application or the discovery of a
relevant patent in a patent portfolio, after the submission of a
contribution,
Contribution, a disclosure must be made by the Contributor or his
employer or sponsor or other organization holding rights in the IPR
as soon as reasonably possible after the IPR becomes reasonably and
personally known to the Contributor.
Bradner [Page 8]
Internet-Draft IP in IETF Technology May 2003
6.2.2 Timing of disclosure under section Section 6.1.2
The disclosure must be made as soon as reasonably possible after the
IPR becomes reasonably and personally known to the IETF participant.
6.3 How must a disclosure be made?
IPR disclosures are made by following the instructions at
http://www.ietf.org/ipr-instructions.
6.4 What must be in a disclosure?
6.4.1 The disclosure must list the numbers of any issued or published
patents or indicate that the claim is based on unpublished patent
applications. The disclosure must also list the specific IETF
Documents or activity affected. If the IETF Document is an Internet-
Draft, it must be referenced by specific version number. In
addition, if the IETF Document includes multiple parts and it is not
reasonably apparent which part of such IETF Document is alleged to be
Covered by the IPR in question, the discloser should identify the
sections of the IETF Document that are alleged to be so Covered.
6.4.2 If a an IPR disclosure was made on the basis of a patent
application:
(a) if such patent application (either
published or unpublished), was unpublished when the IPR
disclosure was made, a new disclosure must be made upon the
publication of such a previously unpublished patent application, the
abandonment of the application and/or application;
(b) a new disclosure must be made upon the issuance of a patent
thereon. The
thereon, the new disclosure must include the patent number and, if
the claims of the granted issued patent differ from those of the
application in manner material to the relevant IETF Contribution,
such disclosure must describe any differences in applicability to
the IETF
Contribution.
Note that Contribution;
(c) the disclosure should be withdrawn upon the abandonment of the
application.
6.4.3 The requirement for an IPR disclosure is not satisfied by the
submission of a blanket statement of possible IPR on every
Contribution. This is the case because the aim of the disclosure
requirement is to provide information about specific IPR against
specific technology under discussion in the IETF. The requirement is
also not satisfied by a blanket statement of willingness to license
all potential IPR under fair and non-discriminatory terms for the
same reason. However, the requirement for an IPR disclosure is
satisfied by a blanket statement of the IPR discloser's willingness
to license all of its potential IPR meeting the requirements of section
Section 6.6 (and either Section 6.1.1 or 6.1.2) to implementers of an
IETF specification on a royalty- free royalty-free basis
Bradner [Page 8]
Internet-Draft IP in IETF Technology April 2003 and other fair reasonable and
non-discriminatory terms.
6.5 What rights licensing information must be detailed in a disclosure?
Bradner [Page 9]
Internet-Draft IP in IETF Technology May 2003
Since IPR disclosures will be used by IETF working groups during
their evaluation of alternative technical solutions, an IPR
disclosure should include information about licensing of the IPR in
case Implementing Technologies require a license. Specifically, it
should indicate whether, upon approval by the IESG for publication as
RFCs of the relevant Internet IETF specification(s), all persons will be able
to obtain the right to implement, use, distribute and exercise other
rights with respect to an Implementing Technology a) under a
royalty-free royalty-
free and otherwise reasonable and non-discriminatory license, or b)
under a license that contains reasonable and non-discriminatory terms
and conditions, including a reasonable royalty or other payment, or
c) without the need to obtain a license from the IPR
owner. holder.
6.6 Interest in IPR mandating disclosures
IPR disclosures under sections 6.1.1. and 6.1.2 are required with
respect to IPR that is owned directly or indirectly, by the
individual or his/her employer or sponsor (if any) or that such
persons otherwise have the right to license or assert.
7. Failure to provide notice disclose
There are cases where individuals are not permitted by their
employers or by other factors to disclose the existence or substance
of patent applications or other IPR. Since disclosure is required
for anyone submitting documents or contributing to participating in IETF discussions,
a person who does not disclose IPR for this, this reason, or any other
reason, must not contribute to or participating in these IETF
activities with respect to technologies that he or she reasonably and
personally knows to be Covered by IPR which he or she is not
permitted to disclose. Contributing to or participating in IETF
discussions about a technology without making required IPR
disclosures is a violation of IETF process.
8. Evaluating alternative technologies in IETF working groups
In general, IETF working groups prefer technologies with no known IPR
claims or, for technologies with claims against them, an offer of
royalty-free licensing. But IETF working groups have the discretion
to adopt technology with a commitment of fair and non-discriminatory
terms, or even with no licensing commitment, if they feel that this
technology is superior enough to alternatives with fewer IPR claims
or free licensing to outweigh the potential cost of the licenses.
Bradner [Page 9]
Internet-Draft IP in IETF Technology April 2003
Over the last few years the IETF has adopted stricter requirements
for some security technologies. It has become common to have a
mandatory-to-implement security technology in IETF technology
Bradner [Page 10]
Internet-Draft IP in IETF Technology May 2003
specifications. This is to ensure that there will be at least one
common security technology present in all implementations of such a
specification that can be use in all cases. This does not limit the
specification from including other security technologies, the use of
which could be negotiated between implementations. An IETF consensus
has developed that no mandatory-to-implement security technology
should be specified in an IETF specification unless it has no known
IPR claims against it or a royalty-free license is available to
implementers of the specification unless there is a very good reason
to do so. This limitation does not extend to other security
technologies in the same specification if they are not listed as mandatory-to- implement.
mandatory-to-implement.
It should also be noted that the absence of IPR disclosures is not
the same thing as the knowledge that there will be no IPR claims in
the future. People or organizations not currently involved in the
IETF. People
IETF or people or organizations that discover IPR they feel to be
relevant in their patent portfolios can make IPR claims disclosures at any
time.
It should also be noted that the validity and enforceability of any
IPR may be challenged for legitimate reasons, and the mere existence
of an IPR claim disclosure should not automatically be taken to mean that
the
underlying disclosed IPR is valid and or enforceable. Although the IETF can
make no actual determination of validity validity, enforceability or
applicability of any particular IPR claim, it is reasonable that a
working group will rely take into account on their own opinions of the applicability
validity, enforceability or validity applicability of
intellectual property rights Intellectual Property
Rights in their evaluation of alternative technologies.
9. Change control for technologies
The IETF must have change control over the technology described in
any standards track documents IETF Documents in order to fix problems that may
be discovered or to produce other derivative works. Contributions to
the IETF in which the Contributors do not grant change control to the
IETF must include the Internet-Draft statement which does not include
the right to make derivative works from [IETF SUB] section Section 3.2.
In some cases the developer of patented or otherwise controlled
technology may decide to hand over to the IETF the right to evolve
the technology (a.k.a "change control"). The implementation of an
agreement between the IETF and the developer of the technology can be
complex. (See [RFC 1790] and [RFC 2339] for examples.)
Note that an IETF standards track document IETF Document can make normative
Bradner [Page 10]
Internet-Draft IP in IETF Technology April 2003
reference to proprietary technology in some cases, for example, when
Bradner [Page 11]
Internet-Draft IP in IETF Technology May 2003
making parameter assignments or encapsulations. encapsulations (e.g., "parameter
value 1234 refers to proprietary technology A" or "proprietary
technology B can be encapsulated using the techniques described in
RFC XYZ.")
10. Licensing requirements to advance standards track documents
RFC 2026 section Section 4.1.2 states: "If patented or otherwise controlled
technology is required for implementation, the separate
implementations must also have resulted from separate exercise of the
licensing process." A key word in this text is "required." The mere
existence of disclosed IPR does not necessarily mean that licenses
are actually required in order to implement the technology. Section
3.3.3
4.1 of this document should be taken to cover apply to the case where there
are multiple implementations and none of the implementers have felt
that they needed to license the technology and they have are no plausible
indications that any IPR claimant(s) holder(s) will try to enforce their
claims. IPR.
11. No IPR disclosures in IETF documents
Contributions to the
IETF that are subject to IPR disclosures Documents should not contain any mention of specific IPR. All
specific IPR disclosures must be submitted as described in section Section 6.
Specific IPR disclosures should not be in the affected IETF documents Documents
because the reader could be misled. The inclusion of a particular
IPR disclosure in an IETF document Document could be interpreted to mean that
the IETF or IESG has formed an opinion on the validity validity,
enforceability or applicability of the IPR. The reader could also be
mislead to think that the included IPR disclosures are the only IPR
disclosures the IETF has received concerning the IETF document.
Readers should always refer to the on-line web page to get a full
list of IPR disclosures received by the IETF concerning any
Contribution. (http://www.ietf.org/ipr/)
12. Security Considerations
This memo relates to IETF process, not any particular technology.
There are security considerations when adopting any technology,
whether IPR-protected or not. A working group should take those
security considerations into account as one part of evaluating the
technology, just as IPR is one part, but they are not issues of
security with IPR procedures.
References
Bradner [Page 11] 12]
Internet-Draft IP in IETF Technology April May 2003
References
13.1 Normative references
[RFC 2026] Bradner, S. (ed), "The Internet Standards Process --
Revision 3", RFC 2026, October 1996
[RFC 2418] Bradner, S. (ed), "Working Group Guidelines and
Procedures", RFC 2518, September 1998
[IETF SUB] work in progress: draft-iprwg-submission-00.txt
13.1 Informative references
[RFC 1790] Cerf, V., "An Agreement between the Internet Society and
Sun Microsystems, Inc. in the Matter of ONC RPC and XDR
Protocols", RFC 1790, April 1995
[RFC 2339] IETF & Sun Microsystems, "An Agreement Between the
Internet Society, the IETF, and Sun Microsystems, Inc. in the
matter of NFS V.4 Protocols", RFC 2339, May 1998
14. Acknowledgements
The editor would like to acknowledge the help of the IETF ipr IPR Working
Group and, in particular the help of Jorge Contreras of Hale and Dorr
for his careful legal reviews of this and other IETF IPR-related and
process documents. The editor would also like to thank Valerie See
for her extensive comments and suggestions.
15. Editors Address
Scott Bradner
Harvard University
29 Oxford St.
Cambridge MA, 02138
sob@harvard.edu +1 617 495 3864
16. Full copyright statement:
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). Except as set forth
below, authors retain all their rights.
This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
Bradner [Page 12]
Internet-Draft IP in IETF Technology April 2003
document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
Bradner [Page 13]
Internet-Draft IP in IETF Technology May 2003
Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for rights
in submissions defined in the Internet Standards process must be
followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
English.
The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/S HE
REPRESENTS (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
17. change log
(note to RFC Editor - remove this section prior to publication)
version 00 to version 01
sec 1 b - add "following normal processes"
sec 1 c - reword
sec 2.2.1 - add "if the contribution is an Internet-Draft"
sec 6 - largely reworked
sec 6.7 - added call for IPR with WG & IETF last calls
sec 7 - add "or participates in a working group discussion" .br
sec 8 - add "or other factors"
sec 14 - redo security considerations
sec 15 - added acknowledgements
sec 18 - added change log
version 01 to version 02
fix miscellaneous typos throughout document
swap personally and reasonably
change "IPR claim" to "IPR disclosure" a number of places
abstract - note update of rfc 2026
sec 1 - remove ISOC
sec 1(c) - reword - remove implication disclose of 3rd party IPR
sec 2.2.1 - reword - remove 3rd party IPR holders
sec 3 (C) - added royalty-free - removed "standards track"
remove text about implementations did not add "implicit"
Bradner [Page 13]
Internet-Draft IP in IETF Technology April 2003
because that is just what the IESG is doing remove "openly
specified"
sec 3.1 - added note about no licensing case
sec 4 - change so RFC Editor adds IPR statements tweak 4(A)
Bradner [Page 14]
Internet-Draft IP in IETF Technology May 2003
so 4(C) could be removed & make it generic to IETF documents
sec 5.1 & 5.2 - included definitions from copyright ID
sec 6.1.1 - last sentence - reword
sec 6.2.1 - append sec 6.2.3
sec 6.2.2 - reword
sec 6.3.1 - tweak wording
sec 6.4 - replace - add royalty-free add granted patent
applications
sec 6.5 1st pp - replace - add royalty-free remove example
classes
sec 6.6 - replace
sec 7 - tweak last sentence
sec 9 - tweak wording add security RF requirement
sec 14.2 - remove unneeded references
ver 02 to ver 03
many editing changes throughout document
generally changed "claim" to "disclosure"
changed the disclosure email addresses and pointed to a web site
for instructions
sec 2.2.1 A - removed detail - reference sec 6.1.1
remove old sec 7
sec 4 - added definition of covered changed other text to use
"covered"
sec 5 - changed def of cover
sec 6.1.1, 6.1.2 & 6.1.3 - reword
open questions: document process for ipr & document
advancement
ver 03 to ver 04
a number of wording clarifications
sec 6.4 2nd pp - removed note of need to state how new IPR applies
because that is redundant with filing a new disclosure
ver 04 to ver 05
sec 6.4 - change Internet-Draft to IETF document
ver 05 to ver 06
a number of wording clarifications
add ToC
move definitions to top of document
sec 2 - expanded definition of Covers
sec 6.4 - restructure - change "must" to "should" for disclosure
on abandonment
sec 7 - added "participating in" in a few places
sec 8 - changed "claim" to disclosure & added enforceability
sec 11 - added IESG & validity, enforceability or applicability
Bradner [Page 14] 15]
Internet-Draft IP in IETF Technology May 2003
Bradner [Page 16]
----