Re: [802SEC] FW: [802SEC] Proposed 802 Chair's Guideline Pertaining to Patents Etc.
Hi Pat,
The requirements that IEEE 802 have to meet are contained in subclause
6.3.2 'Call for patents' of the IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual
[ http://standards.ieee.org/guides/opman/sect6.html#6.3.2 ]. This states
that 'The chair or the chair's delegate of an IEEE standards-developing
working group or the chair of an IEEE standards Sponsor shall be
responsible for informing the members of the working group that if any
individual believes that Patent Claims might be Essential Patent Claims,
that fact should be made known to the entire working group and duly
recorded in the minutes of the working group meeting. This request shall
occur at every standards-developing meeting.'.
While it is up to IEEE 802 to decide the best approach for it to meet
these requirements, the PatCom FAQs strongly recommend that the IEEE
Patent Committee developed slide set be used. In respect to the draft IEEE
802 Chairs Patent Policy Guidelines, as Stuart states in his email below,
he worked on it with a number of folk that developed the updated the
patent policy. I believe that in our opinions the approach in the draft
best meets the requirements contained in the IEEE-SA Standards Board
Operations Manual and the recommendations contained in the PatCom FAQs.
The draft IEEE 802 Chairs Patent Policy Guidelines states the PatCom slide
set is to be shown the same number of times as present, once at the first
meeting of each WG/TG/TF/SG session, although as you note there is an
additional slide to be shown at the start of each subsequent meeting of a
session. While the number of slides in the slide set has increased from
four to six, the number that it says should be read has been reduced from
three to two. In respect to the use of the terms 'session' and 'meeting' I
was under the impression these were well defined and understood terms
within IEEE 802. If this is not the case, I agree that it is something
that may need revisiting.
The use of tick box during registration is a rather different approach
from that recommended by the PatCom FAQs and I don't think has ever been
considered by PatCom. I'd personally recommend that if such an approach is
to be considered the concept should be developed by interested parties and
then reviewed by PatCom. I do personally wonder if a tick box at a IEEE
802 plenary would meet the IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual
requirement that 'This request shall occur at every standards-developing
meeting.' since there are so many meetings going on in that one week. I'd
also like to understand what level of record keeping on IEEE-SA maintained
systems would be required.
To this end, I think the best approach would be for a group of us that are
interested to bring a proposal to PatCom in September. I'm happy to
contribute this effort.
Regards,
David
***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List ***** <STDS-802-SEC@ieee.org>
wrote on 21/06/2007 19:45:06:
> I'm not sure I'm interpreting what you are saying in the attached
> document correctly, but it doesn't seem to give any relief in the amount
> of time that will be taken presenting the patent policy slides. If any
> thing, it expands what is required depending on how "meeting" is
> interpreted. When my task group meets for two days during a plenary, it
> looks like it requires the full slide presentation at the beginning of
> the first day, then if each day is considered a "meeting", the URL slide
> needs to be shown at the beginning of each day. Or does the lunch break
> make the afternoon a new meeting?
> What happened to what we discussed about meetings with registration? It
> would seem just as effective, possibly more effective, to require that
> participants acknowledge that they have read the patent policy slide set
> material in order to complete registration. When this has been done, it
> should be enough at the meeting to show a condensed one page slide with
> URLs and the chair's statement described for online or teleconference
> meetings: "The chair shall also make a statement if any individual
> believes that patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) might be or
> may become essential patent claims, that fact should be made known. The
> fact that this statements were made, and any responses that were given,
> specifically the patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) and/or the
> holder of the patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) that were
> identified (if any) and by whom, shall be duly recorded in the minutes."
> The IETF has acknowledging their patent policy as part of the
> registration process.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List *****
> [mailto:STDS-802-SEC@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Carl R. Stevenson
> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2007 4:01 PM
> To: STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
> Subject: [802SEC] FW: [802SEC] Proposed 802 Chair's Guideline Pertaining
> to Patents Etc.
> 802.22 participants and EC members,
> I have received a number of comments/complaints about the amount of
> meeting time that the "expanded" Patent Policy and Anti-trust slides
> require and the repetitive nature of the presentation thereof (802
> opening plenary/Joint Wireless WG opening plenary, WG opening plenary,
> TG meetings, etc.).
> Thanks to the 802.22 ad hoc leaders who have been including a link to
> the slideset in their weekly conference call agendas and reminding
> participants in each call that our activities are governed by those
> policies.
> As a member of the IEEE-SA Board of Governors ("BoG") I had already
> requested some time for discussion on the agenda of the upcoming BoG
> meeting next week, with the goal of seeking some guidance on how many
> times the slideset needs to be presented, when I received the attached
> message from the Chair of 802.11 to the 802 Executive Committee.
> I will take the contents of the attached document into account in the
> discussions at the BoG next week, but would also welcome any additional
> comments/suggestions from members of 802.22 and/or the 802 EC (on behalf
> of your WG members) that you may have regarding the proposals in the
> attached document.
> Regards,
> Carl
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-stds-802-sec@ieee.org [mailto:owner-stds-802-sec@ieee.org]
> On Behalf Of Stuart J. Kerry
> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2007 4:56 PM
> To: STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
> Cc: David_Law@3com.com; d.ringle@ieee.org
> Subject: [802SEC] Proposed 802 Chair's Guideline Pertaining to Patents
> Etc.
>
> 802 EC Colleagues.
> Paul Nikolich has asked me to forward the attached document to you all
> in advance, regarding the proposed addition to his 802 Chair's
> Guidelines that would pertain to the IEEE patent policy etc, within 802.
> At Paul's request I have been working with David Law and the following
> folks at the IEEE namely, Dave Ringle, Karen Kenney, Michael Lindsay,
> and Claire Topp. We have now reached consensus within this group and
> with this Paul will present for information and discussion at the
> opening EC meeting during our San Francisco meeting.
> May I respectfully suggest that you review the document in advance and
> bring your comments and suggestions with you and make them when Paul
> presents.
> On behalf of Paul, thank you for your consideration.
> Regards
> / Stuart
> _______________________________
> Stuart J. Kerry
> Chair, IEEE 802.11 WLANs WG
> c/o: NXP Semiconductors,
> 1109 McKay Drive, M/S 48A SJ,
> San Jose, CA 95131-1706,
> United States of America.
> +1 (408) 474-7356 - Phone
> +1 (408) 474-5343 - Fax
> +1 (408) 348-3171 - Cell
> eMail: stuart.kerry@nxp.com
> _______________________________
>
> ----------
> This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.
> This list is maintained by Listserv.
> ----------
> This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.
> This list is maintained by Listserv.
> ----------
> This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.
> This list is maintained by Listserv.
----------
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.