[cabfpub] Draft Working Group Charter for Network Security WG
Dimitris Zacharopoulos (HARICA)
dzacharo at harica.gr
Fri Nov 19 11:40:38 UTC 2021
On 19/11/2021 12:03 π.μ., Tim Hollebeek wrote:
>
> The problem is that you would forcing IPR review responsibilities onto
> a bunch of people who explicitly tried to avoid it by not joining the
> working group(s) in question.
>
> This is problematic because “IPR review” isn’t just a review – you’re
> granting IP rights if you don’t make a declaration. This is exactly
> why some companies don’t join some groups – so they aren’t interested
> making IP grants or even disclosures for subject areas they don’t want
> to participate in. And I don’t blame them … why do all that work for
> no benefit to their company?
>
> -Tim
>
I naively thought that once an organization is being notified about a
possible IP conflict, they MUST review in order to claim possible IP
rights. Isn't this the process we follow at a specific WG level? What
happens if a Member neglects to review a Maintenance Guideline and later
finds out that they had IP rights that have made it into a Final Guideline?
Just curious :)
Dimitris.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20211119/17a2627e/attachment.html>
More information about the Public
mailing list