Re: iSCSI: New Lucent stmt on SRP

[Bill Strahm <bill@strahm.net>]

I think David did what was prudent.  As a US citizen he is responsible
for his actions, no matter how unreasonable the prosecution is.  In 
this vein he has couched his advice with a rather mild disclaimer,
i.e. he is not a lawyer, and even if he were, he is not your lawyer...
If you want legal advice please see your lawyer.

The problem is that as WG chair if he expresses what another lawyer 
might interpret as legal advice, David might be responsible for the
"legal" advice that he gave...  Meaning that David personally (not his
company) would be liable for decisions based on his interpretation.

Sounds silly, but that is the way the legal system works in the US., but 
we have become a rather litigious country, and you have to do what you
can to limit your liability, including stupid disclaimer statements...

While I would tend to agree with David's analysis, if I were a large 
company I would not rely on my interpratation, but would seek the 
opinion of an IPR expert to clarify the position...  After all I am 
not a lawyer, but have watched them on TV (IANALBHWTOTV)

Bill
PS See David's disclaimer, It covers any legal sounding statement I have 
made here...

On Mon, Apr 01, 2002 at 08:20:30AM -0800, Sukanta ganguly wrote:
> Mr Black,
>    I did not posting any "quasi-legal" analysis with
> my last email. I don't how you came to that
> conclusion? Chasing red-herrings by my comments? Are
> we ignoring that this is an issue for all the folks
> who have spent two years on this (personally my
> involvement is just about an year into it)? 
>    This is the first time I was told after over eight
> years of IETF participation and implementation of open
> standards protocols that I need to have a lawyer look
> into issues before open standand technology could be
> implemented.
>    
>   I am just interested in knowing what we, as a group,
> have in mind to avoid any legal problems with
> implementing this protocol into a product.
> 
> SG
> 
> 
> --- Black_David@emc.com wrote:
> > This is nowhere near as bad as Jim's post makes it
> > out to
> > be.  PLEASE talk to a lawyer *before* posting
> > quasi-legal
> > analysis of this sort so we can avoid chasing red
> > herrings.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > --David
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Sukanta ganguly [mailto:sganguly@yahoo.com]
> > > Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 7:36 PM
> > > To: Williams, Jim; 'Black_David@emc.com';
> > ips@ece.cmu.edu
> > > Subject: RE: iSCSI: New Lucent stmt on SRP
> > > 
> > > 
> > > This seems a bit odd. With all the legal
> > mumbo-jumbo,
> > > it makes lives of us smaller entities really bad.
> > > For this to work, if Lucent wants to contribute
> > the
> > > patent to the IETF then they should simply come
> > out
> > > and say so.
> > > 
> > > There are too many, if's and but's in this ordeal.
> > 
> > > 
> > > Is there any possibility of looking at
> > alternatives
> > > without Lucent's SRP in the IETF spec?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > SG
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- "Williams, Jim" <Jim.Williams@emulex.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > What does "on the basis of reciprocity" mean.
> > > > Does this mean that if a company has ANY patent
> > > > they do not wish to license to Lucent, then
> > > > Lucent may deny rights to SRP?  Does this still
> > > > meet the IETF requirements for reasonable and
> > > > non-discriminatory?
> > > > 
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Black_David@emc.com
> > > > [mailto:Black_David@emc.com]
> > > > > Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 10:03 AM
> > > > > To: ips@ece.cmu.edu
> > > > > Subject: iSCSI: New Lucent stmt on SRP
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > >    http://www.ietf.org/ietf/IPR/LUCENT-SRP
> > > > > 
> > > > > --David
> > > > >
> > > >
> > ---------------------------------------------------
> > > > > David L. Black, Senior Technologist
> > > > > EMC Corporation, 42 South St., Hopkinton, MA 
> > > > 01748
> > > > > +1 (508) 249-6449 *NEW*      FAX: +1 (508)
> > > > 497-8500
> > > > > black_david@emc.com         Cell: +1 (978)
> > > > 394-7754
> > > > >
> > > >
> > ---------------------------------------------------
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > Yahoo! Greetings - send holiday greetings for
> > Easter, Passover
> > > http://greetings.yahoo.com/
> > > 
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Greetings - send holiday greetings for Easter, Passover
> http://greetings.yahoo.com/