[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 :)

-------------- 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