Network Working Group T. Narten
Request for Comments: 4879 IBM
BCP: 79 April 2007
Category: Best Current Practice
Clarification of the Third Party Disclosure Procedure in RFC 3979
Status of This Memo
This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the
Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
improvements. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
This document clarifies and updates a single sentence in RFC 3979.
Specifically, when third party Intellectual Property Rights (IPR)
disclosures are made, the intention is that the IETF Executive
Director notify the IPR holder that a third party disclosure has been
filed, and to ask the IPR holder whether they have any disclosure
that needs to be made, per applicable RFC 3979 rules.
Narten Best Current Practice [Page 1]RFC 4879 Third Party Fix for RFC 3979 April 20071. Introduction
This document clarifies and updates a single sentence in RFC 3979
[RFC3979]. Specifically, when third party IPR disclosures are made,
the intention is that the IETF Executive Director notify the IPR
holder that a third party disclosure has been filed, and to ask the
IPR holder whether they have any disclosure that needs to be made,
per applicable RFC 3979 rules.
This document updates RFC 3979.
2. The Fix
RFC 3979, Section 4 (C), states:
(C) Where Intellectual Property Rights have been disclosed for IETF
Documents as provided in Section 6 of this document, the IETF
Executive Director shall request from the discloser of such IPR,
a written assurance that upon approval by the IESG for
publication as RFCs of the relevant IETF specification(s), all
persons will be able to obtain the right to implement, use,
distribute and exercise other rights with respect to
Implementing Technology under one of the licensing options
specified in Section 6.5 below unless such a statement has
already been submitted.
In the case of third party disclosures, it makes no sense to ask the
discloser about potential licensing terms, since they do not own the
IPR. Instead, it only makes sense to ask the IPR holder.
This document updates RFC 3979 by changing the word "discloser" to
"holder" in the above text.
3. Security Considerations
This document has no known security implications.
4. Normative Reference
[RFC3979] Bradner, S., "Intellectual Property Rights in IETF
Technology", BCP 79, RFC 3979, March 2005.
Narten Best Current Practice [Page 2]RFC 4879 Third Party Fix for RFC 3979 April 2007Author's Address
3039 Cornwallis Ave.
PO Box 12195 - BRQA/502
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-2195
Narten Best Current Practice [Page 3]RFC 4879 Third Party Fix for RFC 3979 April 2007Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
retain all their rights.
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND
THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF
THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be