I agree that Darren is overreacting in words, but maybe not in substance. I think that a co-chair generally plays some role within his own company, and can/should steer it away from behavior disruptive to the work of the standards body that this co-chair is overseeing. I would expect that from a co-chair, anyway. Particularly, when it comes to frivolous patents that serve nothing other than cast a shadow over the potential standard and hamper enthusiasm of WG members.
While I certainly don't have enough information to judge what has gone on within that company, I would agree that appearance is not good because it raises doubt about potential co-chair involvement in an activity which hinders WG work. Let me be clear, I don't question David's personal character, but if the *appearance* of potential conflict of interests serves to de-motivate WG members, I don't think it is a good thing. It is a little bit weird for a group to be led by a person from company which cast shadow over viability of the standard. I have personally spent a lot of effort on this work over the years. And if members of WG feel betrayed, rightly or wrongly, I would side with their point of view, so the work can continue with less friction. Thanks, Anton. > -----Original Message----- > From: Rainer Gerhards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 4:16 PM > To: Darren Reed; David B Harrington > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [Syslog] Call for David Harrington to resign > from syslog asco-chair > > Darren, > > I think you have mis-read the IPR disclosure. The section > numbers in roman numbers refer to the IPR claim and not the > I-D sections. > > I would also like to voice that I am very happy that David is > co-charing this group. The current discussion has shown how > professional and ethical his leadership of the WG is. There > is nothing that would justify to step back from this position. > > I also think that you are exaggerating the situation. While I > do not like the move by Huawei (and have voiced that), I also > think there is nothing evil per sé in this move. IMHO Huawei > is simply using an abusive patent system. This is a > difference to someone abusing a non-abusive system. The > primary thing to do is fight the abusive system itself - as > we in Europe try to avoid an US-like patent system over here. > As far as I know, even the US is reconsidering the current > patent system. I do not know about China, Australia and > Japan, but my uninformed impression is that it is as bad > there as it is in the US. I also think we shouldn't wonder > that the Chineese do what we have told them for years now: we > have ever and ever told them that they must respect the > western way of IPR. Are they really to blame they are doing > it now? Has someone forgotten to think about the situation > that they themselves use it to their advantage? Believe me, a > country of this size and population has lots of (real) inventors... ;) > > Back to this case: I still see lack of an innovation. The > thing also smells bad if I look at the timing. Anyhow, the > action to take is to clarify the claim and see how to avoid > it. Chris is handling this perfectly. I think it was also > important to voice that we are unhappy with a patent claim. > This has been done. David has done his chore of notifying the > WG - exactly as required by IETF policies. A thing left to do > (once we know details) is to make clear that the patent claim > is invalid and there are lots of prior art. As far as I know, > you Darren, had started the WG with syslog/ssl in mind. So > you are probably in one of the best position to proove this > prior art. Please do that once the details are clear. > > IMHO we should not be overreacting: if that IPR claim is the > worst thing that happens to the WG, we are very lucky. It's a > weak one, even though it is disturbing and eventually > time-consuming. I think we've had bigger problems and we were > able to solve them. Having to deal with lawyers is nothing > that make a tech guy happy (at least not me...), but > sometimes this is unavoidable. > > Having said all this, please let me repeat that I prefer to > have no syslog RFC than to have one that is taken hostage by > a nonsense patent claim. Just to make sure I will not be > misunderstood in this regard. But it is no solution to run > away as soon as somebody screams "IPR" into the crowd... > > Rainer > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Darren Reed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 7:23 PM > > To: David B Harrington > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: [Syslog] Call for David Harrington to resign from > > syslog as co-chair > > > > As someone who works fr the offending company, I might point > > out that the lodged IPR statement does not accurately reference > > the draft at all. It talks about "section IV" and "section V". > > The current draft has no "section IV" or "section V". > > The draft does have sections labelled "section 4" and "section 5". > > If you know anything of legal documents and messages then you will > > understand that they need to be accurate. Ask your lawyer for > > more information on this. > > > > Given your role as chair and that you are employed by the > > company involved, I would like to ask you to resign your > > role as co-chair here because I believe your commercial > > interests are compromising the direction and role of this > > group. > > > > If you do not wish to voluntarily resign I will ask the > > group to take a vote on this matter. As it stands, there > > are a number of people who do not like this move and I > > can imagine any number of them would feel betrayed by it. > > > > Darren > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > As co-chair it is my responsibility to make the WG aware > that there > > > has been a disclosure that an unpublished pending patent > application > > > might be infringed by the implementation of the specifications in > > > draft-ietf-syslog-transport-tls-01.txt. > > > > > > The disclosure can be found at > > > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/ipr_detail_show.cgi?&ipr_id=717. > > > > > > David Harrington > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > co-chair, Syslog WG > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Syslog mailing list > > > Syslog@lists.ietf.org > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Syslog mailing list > > Syslog@lists.ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog > > > > _______________________________________________ > Syslog mailing list > Syslog@lists.ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog > _______________________________________________ Syslog mailing list Syslog@lists.ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
