On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 03:04:08PM -0700, Ted Hardie wrote:
An important part of the IETF process is that we treat all of its
participants
as behaving in good faith. If the license terms offered cause difficulties
for you, please state how the terms impact your development and deployment.
(Eric's description of the sublicensing issue for Sendmail is a good example
here, and I encourage you to read it as a potential model).
Stating that the _holder_ of the IPR is the problem, rather than the _terms_
of the license, is very different. That is contrary to the principle that
we
treat all participants as behaving in good faith. Please focus on the
terms,
not the holder.
Ok, let me rephrase that:
FWIW, my hand is raised. I oppose against an internet standard that requires a
contract with a multinational company to implement, specifically a contract of
which the legal consequences to my operations are unclear and can only be
safely ascertained by hiring a lawyer.
'Good faith' is a highly subjective term, I can't assume anything about this
contract without consulting a lawyer. When I'm being told 'go contact your
attorney' I can not assume good faith. Good faith doesn't need lawyers or law
suits. The fact that this license does (note that it mentions 'sue' a couple of
times), violates (to me at least) the definition of 'good faith'.
Koen Martens
--
K.F.J. Martens, Sonologic, http://www.sonologic.nl/
Networking, embedded systems, unix expertise, artificial intelligence.
Public PGP key: http://www.metro.cx/pubkey-gmc.asc
Wondering about the funny attachment your mail program
can't read? Visit http://www.openpgp.org/