mark,
does this mean that we should resubmit the drafts?
abbie
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Day [mailto:markday@cisco.com]
> Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 11:54 AM
> To: cdn
> Subject: patent language for all drafts
>
>
> I believe that for all parties to feel that all
> intellectual-property issues
> are being addressed in the most explicit fashion possible, all of this
> group's drafts should include the following text. I apologize for the
> 11th-hour change.
>
> "Cisco Systems has an issued patent (US 6,052,718) and
> patents pending that
> may relate to this proposal. If this proposal is adopted by
> the IETF and any
> patents issued to Cisco or its subsidiaries with claims that
> are necessary
> for
> practicing this proposal, any party will be able to obtain
> the right to
> implement, use and distribute the technology or works when
> implementing,
> using or distributing technology based upon the specific
> specification(s)
> under openly specified, reasonable, non-discriminatory terms."
>
> I will further note that to the best of my personal knowledge
> none of the
> pending patents relate specifically to CDI or "content
> peering." However,
> they do relate to aspects of "content distribution
> technology" and so it's
> hard to argue a priori that CDI would be completely
> unaffected by them.
>
> Again, my apologies for the timing. I should have sent a
> version of this
> message a week or more ago but lost track of it as a to-do, and only
> realized today that it was still undone.
>
> --Mark
>
> Mark Stuart Day
> Senior Scientist
> Cisco Systems
> +1 (781) 663-8310
> markday@cisco.com
>
>
>