W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org > July to September 1999

RE: Disclosure of IPR that "might" be relevant

From: Scott McLeod <smcleod@factpoint.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 16:31:21 -0400
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990726163121.00928430@factpoint.com>
To: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
Here is the result of a small side conversation.  I don't think this
will ever really be an issue but I thought the best possible was to
error on the side of caution.

I agree with Joseph's suggestion that addition questions might be best
directed to me off the email list and only brought back into the general
discussion if something comes up which turns out to be relevant to the 
working group.


>X-Sender: reagle@localhost
>X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32)
>Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 08:43:53 -0400
>To: Scott McLeod <smcleod@factpoint.com>
>From: "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <reagle@w3.org>
>Subject: RE: Disclosure of IPR that "might" be relevant
>Cc: "John Boyer" <jboyer@uwi.com>, pnorman@factpoint.com,
>        "Donald E. Eastlake 3rd" <dee3@us.ibm.com>, <dee3@torque.pothole.com>
>
>I think this is good for the list, but the thread need not go farther than
>that.
>
>At 08:11 PM 7/22/99 -0400, Scott McLeod wrote:
> >[Joseph - I've cc'd you to ask the question, "is this an appropriate
> > response to the entire list or something better left in a private
> > reply?"]
> >
> >John,
> >
> >Thanks for the very kind offer.  We've been following UWI, who we see
> >as a technical leader in the forms business (both on the web and off).
> >
> >Our patents (which the lawyers insist I can't talk about in detail yet)
> >don't deal with signing directly but an idea (we think is new) and 
> >which we are calling "Content Certification".  While our web site is
> >more marketing fluff than any engineer would like, it does provide a
> >general idea of where we're going.
> >
> >I think you'll see pretty quickly that signing web content (XML or not)
> >is only one component of Content Certification.  Since we expect to use
> >whatever standard comes out of the group, we're interested in helping 
> >the group succeed.
> >
> >I also realize that sometimes the scope of a working group can grow to
> >encompass additional problem sets.  Our patents will only be relevant 
> >if this happens.
> >
> >At 03:06 PM 7/22/99 -0700, you wrote:
> >>Hi Scott,
> >>
> >>You may want to review your patent applications against what is currently
> >>being done in XFDL.  UWI would also be happy to have a look at them.  We
> >>have been selling systems that digitally sign XML documents since at least
> >>January 1998, and we have dated technical specifications dated back to
>4Q97
> >>and perhaps even 3Q97 (I'd have to check our archives).  Hence if such a
> >>patent were awarded, then UWI would most likely be in a position to
>dispute
> >>the patent using UFDL and XFDL as "Prior Art".
> >>
> >>Perhaps you could be more specific about what is claimed...
> >>
> >>John Boyer
> >>Software Development Manager
> >>UWI.Com -- The Internet Forms Company
> >>
> >>
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: w3c-ietf-xmldsig-request@w3.org
> >>[mailto:w3c-ietf-xmldsig-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Scott McLeod (by
> >>way of "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <reagle@w3.org>)
> >>Sent: Thursday, July 22, 1999 2:49 PM
> >>To: IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG
> >>Cc: smcleod@factpoint.com
> >>Subject: Disclosure of IPR that "might" be relevant
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>We have intellectual property rights which may be related to the signing
>of
> >>HTML and XML documents. These are embodied in two patent applications
>filed
> >>in the current year and possibly other future patents.
> >>
> >>It is our intention to license any aspects of these patents relevant to
>the
> >>work of the digital signature group to W3C members and members of the XML
> >>digital signature group under fair, nominal and non-discriminatory terms.
> >>
> >>We will disclose the filed patents after we have finished amending the
> >>claims.
> >>We expect that any future patents derived from technology developed or
> >>currently planned will either not affect the XML signature group effort,
>or
> >>have only a complimentary effect.
> >>
> >>~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
> >> Scott C McLeod       :  smcleod "at" Factpoint.com
> >> Managing Architect   :  781-685-1626
> >> Factpoint, Inc.      :  "Dream often and dream big!"
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
> > Scott C McLeod       :  smcleod "at" Factpoint.com
> > Managing Architect   :  781-685-1626
> > Factpoint, Inc.      :  "Dream often and dream big!"
> >
>_________________________________________________________
>Joseph Reagle Jr.   
>Policy Analyst           mailto:reagle@w3.org
>XML-Signature Co-Chair   http://w3.org/People/Reagle/
>
>
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
 Scott C McLeod       :  smcleod "at" Factpoint.com
 Managing Architect   :  781-685-1626
 Factpoint, Inc.      :  "Dream often and dream big!"
Received on Monday, 26 July 1999 16:32:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.29 : Thursday, 13 January 2005 12:10:07 GMT