In
<D96522A138F4D4479CB5F7F583B98F05832EFB(_at_)df-chewy-msg(_dot_)exchange(_dot_)corp(_dot_)microsoft(_dot_)com>
"Harry Katz" <hkatz(_at_)exchange(_dot_)microsoft(_dot_)com> writes:
I'd also like to address a number of points that have been made on this
thread and on others in recent days.
Thank you for answering some of the questions.
First, a reminder. Answer 4 of the FAQ which I published to this list
on August 23 (available at
http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/mail-archive/msg03497.html) says:
[no license is required right now because no patent has been
granted]
True, but for all I know, MS has been granted a license 5 minutes
ago. This is a time bomb.
Second as per the terms of the license itself, End Users who are
recipients of a licensed implementation of Sender ID and distributors
who are redistributing a branded licensed implementation do not need to
separately sign this License Agreement.
If redistributing source does not need a license, why does the license
say "If you would like a license from Microsoft (e.g. rebrand,
redistribute), you need to contact Microsoft directly."?
Finally we have committed to a royalty free license. That means
Microsoft will never charge a royalty or licensing fee to anyone using
the Sender ID necessary patent claims to implement the Sender ID
specification.
While MS will not charge a licensing fee, there are costs to obtaining
a license, both in terms of time and the money needed to send
certified letters and such.
-wayne