see comments inline
abbie
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fred Douglis [mailto:douglis@research.att.com]
> Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 1:25 PM
> To: Mark Day
> Cc: cdn
> Subject: Re: patent language for all drafts
>
>
> Mark,
>
> I raised the question of including a generic comment in all
> drafts, rather
> than the specific statements as you proposed. It received
> little comment
> other than Abbie's fear of how the intellectual property
> would affect the
> standards efforts (if I'm characterizing that correctly).
Not really, it is not fear????, it is the right thing to do !!!!!!
The point here is we should know in advance what part or parts of the work are
covered by patents or IP. Basically, we need everyone to come out clean in advance.
>
> If people change the drafts today to include Cisco's
> statement, they'll have
> to change it tomorrow, or next week, or whenever to include the next
> statement. (We have to make some statement as well, which I
> am trying to get
> formalized.)
>
> Can we use more generic language, saying that the IETF has
> been or will be
> apprised of any company's intellectual property?
see above remark. Generic statements may not be enough.
>
> Fred
>
>
>