On 2009-11-24 06:44, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: > On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 08:16:49 -0500 > Scott Brim <scott.b...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Simon Josefsson allegedly wrote on 11/23/2009 5:03 AM: >>> John-Luc said he is bound by confidentiality obligations from his >>> company, and I think the same applies to most employees of larger >>> organizations. There is nothing explicit in BCP 79 to protect >>> against this apparent conflict of interest, or is there? >> Since disclosure is required >> for anyone submitting documents or participating in IETF >> discussions, a person who does not disclose IPR for this reason, or >> any other reason, must not contribute to or participate in IETF >> activities with respect to technologies that he or she reasonably and >> personally knows to be Covered by IPR which he or she will not >> disclose. >> > Precisely. The conflict Simon mentions was of course known to most of > the WG; that's one reason we have that clause.
IMHO, BCP79 creates no particular problem for corporate lawyers who are instructed by their corporate management to ensure that the company behaves as a good citizen in its standards activities. This is strongly in the company's interests, anyway, since failure to disclose when required by a standards process threatens the validity of the patent. It really is not the IETF's problem. It is a problem for a company that chooses not to behave as a good citizen. Brian _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
