datatracker.ietf.org
Sign in
Version 5.3.0, 2014-04-12
Report a bug

Sean Turner's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-mile-sci-04 belonging to The MITRE Corporation

Only those sections of the "Patent Disclosure and Licensing Declaration Template for Notification" where the submitter provided information are displayed.

Update this IPR disclosure. Note: Updates to IPR disclosures must only be made by authorized representatives of the original submitters. Updates will automatically be forwarded to the current Patent Holder's Contact and to the Submitter of the original IPR disclosure.

Submitted Date: May 23, 2012

I. Possible Patent Holder/Applicant ("Patent Holder")
Legal Name: The MITRE Corporation
II. Contact Information for the IETF Participant Whose Personal Belief Triggered this Disclosure:
Name: Sean Turner
Title:
Department:
Address1:
Address2:
Telephone: 17036283180
Fax:
Email: turners@ieca.com
III. IETF Document or Other Contribution to Which this IPR Disclosure Relates:
Internet-Draft:"IODEF-extension for structured cybersecurity information"
(draft-ietf-mile-sci-04)
IV. Disclosure of Patent Information (i.e., patents or patent applications required to be disclosed by Section 6 of RFC 3979)
A. For granted patents or published pending patent applications, please provide the following information:
Patent, Serial, Publication, Registration, or Application/File number(s): The following websites indicate that the MITRE corporation has trademarked CAPEC, CCE, CEE, CPE, CVE, CWSS, CWE, MAEC, OVAL, : http://capec.mitre.org/ http://cce.mitre.org/ http://cee.mitre.org/ http://cpe.mitre.org/ http://cwe.mitre.org/ http://cwe.mitre.org/cwss/ http://cwe.mitre.org/ http://maec.mitre.org/ http://oval.mitre.org/ NIST SP800-126 Rev 1 indicates that OCIL is a trademark of The MITRE Corporation.
Date(s) granted or applied for: Unknown
Country: USA
Additional Notes:

In accordance with RFC 2026 s10 and RFC 3667 s3.6, I'm submitting this 3rd Party IPR disclosure.

B. Does this disclosure relate to an unpublished pending patent application?: NO
C. If an Internet-Draft or RFC includes multiple parts and it is not reasonably apparent which part of such Internet-Draft or RFC is alleged to be covered by the patent information disclosed in Section V(A) or V(B), it is helpful if the discloser identifies here the sections of the Internet-Draft or RFC that are alleged to be so covered:
No information submitted