It is one of the jobs of co-chairs to facilitate discussion of working
group topics. Not that the issue of IPR is being debated lightly,
however we would like to raise a few discussion points that may have
been overlooked or given light treatment.
- Many a message have been dedicated toward discussing the potential
abuse Microsoft may undertake while armed with a patent. However,
there has been little discussion regarding Microsoft's willingness and
ability (via deep pockets) to fend off counter patent claims. Should
Sender ID go forward with the acceptance of Microsoft's IPR, it leaves
little doubt that another entity claiming rights to such technology
will have to go through Microsoft to find remedy. However, if MARID
were to produce another standard such as Classic SPF or even CSV, who
will defend a legal claim against it?
In other words, better the devil we know? I don't think so. Should
IETF completely abandon standards which are not covered by patents
simply out of fear that they will give rise to lawsuits?
[...]
- If it is reasonable to assume that Microsoft's patent application
and claimed IPR can and/or do reach beyond draft-ietf-marid-core and
draft-ietf-marid-pra, is it not the best course of action to take
Microsoft's offer of a royalty-free, nondiscriminatory and reasonable
license given that a rejection of Sender ID as a standard has no weight
on the standing of their claim. In other words, if it is believed that
their claim could cover other work product of MARID, then would not the
best course of action be to secure the best-possible license?
Sure. Just as soon as you tell me exactly what we're licensing. Why
should we have to buy a pig in a poke?
- On the issue of deployment, there have been many messages regarding
the adoption of Sender ID (as a note, the chair's instructions
specifically called for opinion about personal deployment and not
speculation as to the actions of others). While many believe that
Sender ID's encumbrances will slow adoption because it is not as
friendly as desired toward open source, it has been noted that Qmail
also has an equally or more unfriendly license toward open source yet
is one of the most popularly used MTAs.
"But he did it first!"
-andy
-- George Mitchell