Re: Motion to abandon Sender ID
2004-09-01 22:47:55
Yakov Shafranovich wrote:
Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. wrote:
This may be naive in terms of the workings of the group, and
protocol...but rather than abandon Sender I.D., why not contact MS and
explain to them the concerns, and let them clarify? Ask them to put
in writing explicitly what their patent covers with respect to the
items of concern (or, conversely, to put in writing expressly those
things which the patent is warranted to *not* cover), and ask them to
further rewrite the license to address and clarify those areas of
concern as well?
They have obviously put a lot of time and effort in to this, and while
I absolutely agree there are problems with things as they stand today,
and fully expect MS, as any other company, to cover their investments
and their asterisks, in any negotiation, and at this point this is
what it is, it makes sense to say to them "here are the problems which
keep it from moving forward - will you address those problems, or do
we need to abandon it and move on?"
I agree with Anne here - I want to do the same. If we can resolve these
issues and move forward, it would be very helpful.
On a followup note, I sincerely hope that this quote is NOT entirely
true (http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1639576,00.asp):
"Allman also isn't optimistic about Microsoft making Sender ID
open-source friendly. "It's pretty clear that it's going to take an act
of whatever deity Microsoft worships in order to get them to back down
on the sublicensing issue. They made it absolutely clear to us that they
were not even going to consider changing this, and the legal folks made
it further clear that they would rather see Sender ID die than back down."
Yakov
|
|