Re: [emergency] Azos AI, LLC Patent

[Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>]

Title: Re: [emergency] Azos AI, LLC Patent

Thanks Renato,

Apparently, this third party claim is based on an assumption that their patent pertains to any transport protocol that supports a "device for which a communication controller" can "assume control over incoming communications." This is in some sense an Essential Claim.

So I guess we get to research what an Essential Claim means.

W3C:

http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/#def-essential

OASIS:

Essential Claims - those claims in any patent or patent application in any jurisdiction in the world that would necessarily be infringed by an implementation of those portions of a particular OASIS Committee Specification or OASIS Standard created within the scope of the TC charter in effect at the time such specification was developed. A claim is necessarily infringed hereunder only when it is not possible to avoid infringing it because there is no non-infringing alternative for implementing the Normative Portions of that particular OASIS Committee Specification or OASIS Standard. Existence of a non-infringing alternative shall be judged based on the state of the art at the time the OASIS Specification is approved

FWIW: The Patent Abstract:

http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6359970.html

"A communications controller is provided for empowering the user of a communications device, such as a telephone or other device, to assume control over incoming communications...."

Cheers,

Rex

At 9:36 AM +1000 5/2/07, Renato Iannella wrote:

> On 2 May 2007, at 08:47, Rex Brooks
> wrote:
> > This is the first time I have heard of
> > this. My question to OASIS would be: How did this get here? I don't
> > recall this company being associated with this OASIS TC, let alone
> > contributing anything that could be claimed to be ipr essential to
> > CAP. I wonder if this is somehow connected to CAP before it was
> > brought under OASIS? A cursory glance at their website indicates that
> > their technology is "wireless" specific and CAP is transport
> > independent.
>
> The OASIS IPR Policy [1] states that
> anyone can make claims on OASIS
> specs.           
>
> This entry seems to be added 
> on 19 May 2006.   Perhaps the TC should have been
> formally notified?
>
> The IPR Policy also says:
>
> "Any disclosure of Disclosed Claims
> shall include (a) in the case of issued patents and published patent
> applications, the patent or patent application publication number, the
> associated country and, as reasonably practicable, the relevant
> portions of the applicable draft or approved OASIS Committee
> Specification or OASIS Standard; and (b) in the case of unpublished
> patent applications, the existence of the unpublished application and,
> as reasonably practicable, the relevant portions of the applicable
> draft or approved OASIS Committee Specification or OASIS
> Standard."
>
> It seems this was not followed in this
> case. It would be good if the claimant made the effort, so we don't
> have to trawl through patents.
>
>
> Cheers...  Renato
> Iannella
> NICTA
>
> [1] <http://www..oasis-open.org/who/intellectualproperty.php>

-- 

Rex Brooks
President, CEO
Starbourne Communications Design
GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
Berkeley, CA 94702
Tel: 510-849-2309