Re: on the topic of IPR

> Therefore, I don't understand why Microsoft is insisting on such 
> license. Considering that it may seriously hinder deployment as 
> several people have testified, it would make more sense that a license 
> without a requirement to sign an agreement is issued. If the patent 
> trolls will come, the license will not stop them anyway but the patent 
> might. This way Microsoft can have its cake and eat it to.
> Yakov
I do not understand the requirement to sign the license either. Their 
failure to accept a license bound to the standard or required as part of 
the source of an implimentation suguests that they do nto beleive their 
own EULA under which all of there software is distributed are binding or 
enforceable. Regardless, a license include as part of the standard or 
required in the text of any source would likely provide very nearly as 
strong a legal defense against patent counter claims though it still 
might not be acceptable to FOSS it would atleast be much closer.