Subject: RE: draft-zigmond-tv-url-02

From: Dan Zigmond <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 15:07:28 -0700

In this case, I think there is a further wrinkle.  Our IPR statement simply
means that we might not have conducted a search of our portfolio to
determine what if anything we have patented that would be essential to
implement according to our submission.  (Like many large companies, our
patent portfolio is large and searching it would be a substantial effort.)
To the extent that we do have any patents, however, we are willing to
license them for free.  The statement that we made is typical of almost all
companies who make submission and who have large patent portfolios (except
that most of those companies agree to license on reasonable and
non-discriminatory terms, not for free).  The statement does not mean that
Microsoft is representing that it has or has even looked for essential
patents.

If anyone wants an answer about what might be patentable in our submission,
they should consult his their patent attorney.

	Dan

---------------------------------------------------
Dan Zigmond
Senior Manager, Broadcast Applications
WebTV Networks, Inc.
[email-masked]
---------------------------------------------------

-----Original Message-----
From: John Stracke [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Monday, August 23, 1999 1:49 PM
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: draft-zigmond-tv-url-02

[email-masked] wrote:

> The IP statement in the draft is simply silly.  If there's something in
> the document which requires a license --- i.e., due to a patent,
> etc. then the document should explicitly say that some part of the
> technology is patented.

Not necessarily possible.  There could be a patent pending, and the rule
of thumb seems to be not to talk about upcoming patents until they're
public (probably because it's easier to get a patent blocked than to get
it overturned).

--
/=============================================================\
|John Stracke    | My opinions are my own | S/MIME & HTML OK  |
[email-masked]|============================================|
|Chief Scientist | NT's lack of reliability is only surpassed |
|eCal Corp.      |  by its lack of scalability. -- John Kirch |
\=============================================================/