This didn't seem to make it
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 15:51:43 -0500 (EST)
From: Dean Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Contreras, Jorge [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: ietf@ietf.org, Harald Tveit Alvestrand [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Legal review results 1
This doesn't seem to have made it to the list...
-- Forwarded Message --
Date: mandag, januar 24, 2005 15:53:48 -0500
From: Contreras, Jorge [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Brian E Carpenter [EMAIL PROTECTED], Harald Tveit Alvestrand
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: RE: Legal
: Wednesday, January 26, 2005 14:49
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: RE: Legal review results 1: Intellectual property (fwd)
This doesn't seem to have made it to the list...
-- Forwarded Message --
Date: mandag, januar 24, 2005 15:53:48 -0500
From: Contreras, Jorge [EMAIL
Did you get a look at this below? It seems to have been lost in the noise,
so I'll repost.
The notion of giving source code but retaining patent rights is not
entirely academic. Novell asserted (for a while anyway) that it never
transfered patents covering Unix to SCO. Some people/companies
You gave an excellent argument why one should use intellectual property
and not the individual categories.
You forgot service marks, for one thing.
--On onsdag, januar 26, 2005 15:51:43 -0500 Dean Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Did you get a look at this below? It seems to have been lost in
I brought up the issue of sublicensing. Perhaps I missed discussion
in the flood of messages. Assuming I didn't, let me try and prod people?
Do people believe the issue of sublicensing is not worth discussing or
are we all just unsure what to say about it?
--Sam
At 6:23 PM -0500 1/26/05, Sam Hartman wrote:
I brought up the issue of sublicensing. Perhaps I missed discussion
in the flood of messages. Assuming I didn't, let me try and prod people?
Do people believe the issue of sublicensing is not worth discussing or
are we all just unsure what to say
Ted == Ted Hardie [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ted At 6:23 PM -0500 1/26/05, Sam Hartman wrote:
I brought up the issue of sublicensing. Perhaps I missed
discussion in the flood of messages. Assuming I didn't, let me
try and prod people?
Do people believe the issue of
Passed the question to Jorge.
If the IAD shall ensure that such contract grants to ISOC the perpetual,
irrevocable right, on behalf of IASA and IETF, to use, display, distribute,
reproduce, modify and create derivatives of such Data. doesn't cover
sublicensing (as in letting others use to our
