ietf-mxcomp
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Licensing issues

2004-07-16 09:57:51


You corporate guys appear to have bunched together in a group and *DO
NOT* appear to want to *HEAR* what the non-corporates think!

It is very clear that none of the people raising objections in this
thread have bothered to read the archives of this mailing list.

I don't want to hear if you don't listen.

The issue was raised, we are waiting for clarification from the lawyers. 

Accusing Microsoft of bad faith less than 48 hours after the request
for clarification is made does not appear to me to be a good faith
complaint.


| And BTW GNU would be an entirely unacceptable licensing scheme for
| a patent controlling a protocol standard in any case.

Fine. Then use SPF-Classic which is unencumbered and let's have done
with it. How in the sam hill do you patent something which is
pre-defined in pre-existing RFC's? Sheesh! I did not "PRA" 
for this! :-)

I don't know why the USPTO does such a lousy job, but it is a fact
that it does, there have been something like 100 patents filed by
third parties on my own work, the applications being made long after
publication and in many cases referencing the work. Defending against
these bogus claims can cost millions.


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