This is certainly a good point. Stating whether certain claims are valid
or not valid is not a good use of our time and may lead to legal
problems later on.
So, read through the patents and make your own assessment whether this
IPRs are a concern for you and whether you want anything in the drafts
to be changed.
On 02/28/2013 11:53 PM, prateek mishra wrote:
Two points -
1) I request that this mailing list NOT be used for any substantive
discussion of patent claims and so on. This will create difficulties for
many participants and
I dont believe is within the charter of this effort.
2) I would encourage interested parties to review the following
document, which may be relevant to this discussion
http://www.w3.org/2011/xmlsec-pag/
- prateek
Hi Oleg,
my personal experience with Certicom's IPR disclosures is that they
focus on Elliptic Curve Cryptography. There were several IPR
disclosures on documents in the JOSE WG and some of them contain ECC
algorithms.
The JWT does not list an ECC algorithm but the referenced documents do.
Having said that the two cited IPRs seem to be:
http://www.google.com/patents/US6704870
http://www.google.com/patents/US7215773
Take a look at it and make your assessment whether there is anything
we can change.
Ciao
Hannes
On 02/28/2013 09:21 PM, Oleg Gryb wrote:
Dear OAuth WG and Chairs,
Can somebody please comment the Certicom's disclosure below? If the
purpose of this disclosure is to inform us that JWT can be potentially a
subject of royalties and other possible legal actions, the value of
adopting JWT in the scope of OAuth 2.0 IETF standard would definitely
diminish and if this is the case shouldn't we consider replacing it with
something similar, but different, which would not be a subject of the
future possible litigation?
I'm not a lawyer and might not understand the statement below correctly,
so please let me know if/where I'm wrong. Please keep in mind also that
the popularity of JWT is growing fast along with the implementations, so
we need to do something quickly.
Thanks,
Oleg.
--- On *Wed, 2/27/13, IETF Secretariat /<ietf-...@ietf.org>/* wrote:
From: IETF Secretariat <ietf-...@ietf.org>
Subject: [OAUTH-WG] IPR Disclosure: Certicom Corporation's Statement
about IPR related to draft-ietf-oauth-json-web-token-06 (2)
To: m...@microsoft.com, ve7...@ve7jtb.com, n-sakim...@nri.co.jp
Cc: de...@ihtfp.com, oauth@ietf.org, ipr-annou...@ietf.org
Date: Wednesday, February 27, 2013, 4:16 PM
Dear Michael Jones, John Bradley, Nat Sakimura:
An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled
"JSON Web Token
(JWT)" (draft-ietf-oauth-json-web-token) was submitted to the IETF
Secretariat
on 2013-02-20 and has been posted on the "IETF Page of Intellectual
Property
Rights Disclosures" (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1968/). The
title of the
IPR disclosure is "Certicom Corporation's Statement about IPR
related to draft-
ietf-oauth-json-web-token-06 (2)."");
The IETF Secretariat
_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list
OAuth@ietf.org </mc/compose?to=OAuth@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list
OAuth@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list
OAuth@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
_______________________________________________
OAuth mailing list
OAuth@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
