It's clear that we can't say "no licensed IPR" since the only IPR we
will know about is that of the participants in the WG. We might
successfully exclude all the IPR from a participant who is friendly to
the effort only to have some patent troll come along who aims to shake
down the industry. I don't see how that's an improvement.
Mark
On Sep 27, 2004, at 9:51 AM, Andrew Newton wrote:
On Sep 25, 2004, at 12:44 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:
That is tempting to add to the charter, yes, but I would like to
very strongly encourage folks not to think in terms of
game-playing or subtleties for an IETF working group charter.
I think putting this in the charter is a sure-fire way of getting
people to take aim at the charter and shooting down the wg proposal.
How about making the first milestone a working group decision on IPR?
As in, the wg is to decide either no licensed IPR, or licensed IPR
compatible with an explicit list of software licenses, or any licensed
IPR.
-andy