Subject: Re: [Roll] IPR ROLL

From: Dan Lang <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 22:25:25 -0800

In addition to responding to Ruben, I'd like to comment on a couple of  
other points that have been raised.  One commenter worried that they  
will “be forced to use RPL and pay Cisco royalties because Smart  
Energy 2.0 is specifying RPL as their routing protocol”  (http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/roll/current/msg03008.html 
); another asked if Cisco would be “willing to provide a royalty-free  
license to their patents” (http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/roll/current/msg03015.html 
).  Again, you should consult with your own legal counsel, but Cisco’s  
statement will have the same practical effect to you as a royalty-free  
patent license.  In essence, Cisco is promising not to sue you, and is  
not asking you to pay it any royalties, under any Cisco essential  
patents, for any of your products that implement the RPL standard.  As  
I mentioned before, this commitment may go away if you sue Cisco with  
your own patents.  In that case, Cisco may ask you to pay for a  
license to its essential RPL patents on reasonable and non- 
discriminatory terms.

Best regards,
Dan

Dan Lang
Director, Intellectual Property
Legal Services
Cisco Systems, Inc.