Andrew Newton wrote:
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.
I am new to participation in this group, though like many I have a
vested interest in a successful standard.
But what is it that Microsoft claims to actually own ?
Working with Microsoft is better than working against them, though I
confess a strong distaste for intellectual property rights in general -
You can not own ideas.
Despite my personal views IP is a reality that must be dealt with.
However, atleast in the U.S. a patent is supposed to be non-obvious,
unique, not previously published, and represent more than just a
compilation of peices.
What I understand of Sender-ID, Caller-ID, and SPF, does not seem
to contain anything patentable.
Most of the core principles have been considered numerous times
over the years. SPAM and Phishing were not the problems they are today
and the costs were generally not deemed acceptable,
but validating the sender of a message, and as I see it that is
really the core of all of this is just not a new idea.
Storing verification information in DNS TXT records, whether in
XML or any other format or any of the other bells and whistles that may
be important parts of a working implimentation and work
deserving recognition just does not seem patentable to me.
Regardless, what is it that Microsoft actually owns that is being
argued about ?