Sign in
Version 5.3.0, 2014-04-12
Report a bug

Stephen Farrell's statement about possible IPR claimed in draft-housley-tls-authz-extns-07.txt belonging to Siemens

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: March 5, 2007

I. Possible Patent Holder/Applicant ("Patent Holder")
Legal Name: Siemens
II. Contact Information for the IETF Participant Whose Personal Belief Triggered this Disclosure:
Name: Stephen Farrell
Telephone: +353-87-854-0597
III. IETF Document or Other Contribution to Which this IPR Disclosure Relates:
Internet-Draft:"Transport Layer Security (TLS) Authorization Extensions"
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): EP97103790, US6,163,844
Date(s) granted or applied for: march 06, 1997
Country: Germany
Additional Notes:

I was an inventor. The Siemens subsidiary involved no longer
exists. I don't know where the ownership ended up.
The filing is extremely unclear, even for a patent - the reason is that
the lawyer translated my input to German, filed that and later translated
back to English, all without checking back with any of the inventors.
The German version may be more easily understood, I don't know.
The original filing was to protect a product that sent SESAME PACs (inside
GSS tokens) to & fro in order to do access control for web clients &
servers. The I-D isn't doing that, but the claims might be written
broadly enough to be a concern.

B. Does this disclosure relate to an unpublished pending patent application?: 0
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