| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
All, From conversations I’ve had with several folks that regularly work on standards-setting at the IEEE, as well as other of my colleagues, there seems to continue to be ambiguity about application of the March 2015 patent policy to pre-existing
standards development. I have also heard questions about the impact of so-called “negative” LOAs – submitted LOAs which select the “no license” option – and requested-but-unsubmitted LOAs on IEEE standardization efforts, e.g. Will the IEEE approve a standard
if a patent holder files a negative LOA? I’d like to offer the following 2 new FAQs for consideration to address these 2 points of confusion. I welcome your thoughts. Thanks, Scott Proposed new FAQs: 84A. With respect to projects that were started before 15 March 2015, but have not yet been approved, will there be a transition
period for applying the updated IEEE-SA Patent Policy? Answer: Yes. For an LOA that references a specific amendment of a standard (e.g. 802.3nnn) which was initiated prior to March
15, 2015, but for which the patent holder is submitting the LOA after March 15, 2015, if the Submitter selects option 1(d), the Submitter may attach a statement of commitment to license in compliance with the IEEE-SA Patent Policy that came into effect on
May 1, 2007. A form LOA with the associated statement of commitment is provided here [link].
13B: Will the Standards Board reject a draft specification if “negative” LOAs are submitted? Answer: Not necessarily. The existence of a negative LOA will not necessarily result in rejection of a draft standard. The Standards Board
may, but is not required to, consider a number of factors in its evaluation, including for example:
(a) has the patent holder provided LOAs for other IEEE standards, or other amendments to the same IEEE standard;
(b) the amount and state of patent litigation for the relevant technology;
(c) the general stance of the relevant patent holders in relation to (a) and (b);
(d) upon advice and consultation from the WG chair and/or Sponsor, the relative “importance” of the technology related to the non- or negative-LOA
patents to the overall draft standard; (e) the amount of “life” left in the relevant patents;
(f) if a negative LOA has been filed, at what point of the TG/WG process was it filed; (g) do the patents pertain to a technical contribution made by the Patent Holder (including the Patent Holder’s representative/employee participating
in the TG/WG) ____________________________________________
Sr. Standards Counsel Our Mission: Promote technological leadership, IP value and product sales by delivering world-class standards strategies, processes and legal advice. |