ietf-asrg
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Asrg] IPR Document Update

2003-06-08 18:32:15
Dear Vernon,

1. For the record of all the ASRG members - I am not a lawyer and do not claim to be one. The entire purpose of this document that I am keeping on my own free time, it to record any IPR issues as they come up on the list. I am not searching the USPTO database, not Googling the entire Internet looking for patents. Neither am I analyzing them. If you would have taken care to go through the list, then you would have seen that no where do I offer my own analysis. All statements have been take from either public sources or from ASRG list postings.
2. The analysis statement in question was made by Bob Wyman not by me (see
<https://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/asrg/current/msg05304.html>https://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/asrg/current/msg05304.html), I simply paraphrased it. 3. I moved the statement from the notes section to be directly under the list posting reference to make it more clear. I also removed the reference to DCC which seems to have irked you. I re-quoted the original statement as it was written by Bob instead of paraphrasing it. 4. Once again, my list is not intended to keep track of all IPR issues in the world, only of the ones that come up on the list. Are you implying that I should remove all references to all list postings simply because no one on the list except for you is qualified to express any opinions on IPR matters?

Yakov

At 06:24 PM 6/8/2003 -0600, Vernon Schryver wrote:

> From: Yakov Shafranovich <research(_at_)solidmatrix(_dot_)com>

> The IPR document for the ASRG has been updated. The following was changed:
>
> ADDED: Section 4.2.1. Jakob Nielsen's patent on coordinated filtering. This
> affects systems such as SpamNet, Matador and DCC.

Such obviously false analyses are not helpful.  That I trust you
didn't intend to make a mistake and don't know why your analysis
is false for at least one, probably two, and quite possibly all
three of those mechanisms is all the more reason to not offer such
analyses in the future.

Statements about which patents affect which tactics based on ignorance
of those tactics and superficial reading of patent claims asside, your
list of patents could be interesting to people trying to avoid a few
arbitrarily chosen patents, but it would be utterly foolish to rely
on your list instead of a patent search.  Your list can never be
comprehensive without doing a real patent search, and even then one
cannot know about impending patents.

I apologize for this less than friendly note, but potentially damaging
bogus analyses of intellectual property need to be challenged and
squelched.  In the future, please just collect the patents and leave
the analyzing to patent lawyers, or at least people who are familiar
with the various anti-spam mechanisms.


_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>