Re: iSCSI: New Lucent stmt on SRP

[Sukanta ganguly <sganguly@yahoo.com>]

Bill,
  It was rather kind of you to provide me the
explanation related to the IPR and the US citizen's
responsibility as well as th litigious nature of this
country.
  
Regards
SG
  
--- Bill Strahm <bill@strahm.net> wrote:
> 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/


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Greetings - send holiday greetings for Easter, Passover
http://greetings.yahoo.com/