[rfc-i] RFCs and IPRs

SM sm at resistor.net
Mon Oct 18 15:30:53 PDT 2010

At 06:01 18-10-10, Scott O. Bradner wrote:
>according to
>all IDs must include the text
>"This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with
>the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79"

According to the RFC Editor website ( http://www.rfc-editor.org/indsubs.html ):

   "Every document to be published as an RFC must first be posted
    online as an Internet-Draft with a format following IETF guidelines."

One of the structural informational elements in a RFC is the following:

    "Copyright Notice
       A copyright notice with a reference to BCP 78 [BCP78] and an
       Intellectual Property statement referring to BCP 78 and BCP 79
       [BCP79].  The content of these statements are defined by those

RFC 4844 borrows some text from BCP 78 for IPR about an "Independent 
Submission".  I note that there is no mention of BCP 79 in RFC 
4844.  Quoting the notice in RFC 5992, published in the Independent 
Submissions Stream:

   "This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
    Provisions Relating to IETF Documents"

>BCP 79 requires disclosure of IPR
>so I think that we do require IPR disclosure for non-IETF documents
>(and, historically, many of the IPR disclosures refer to non-IETF

It gets interesting when we look at the IRTF Stream as there are 
declarations such as:

   "If any claim of any patent owned or controlled by [name removed] or
    its Affiliates is essential on a technical ground to the standard
    adopted by IETF"

As usual, the devil is in the details.


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list