On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 06:24:49PM -0400,
Yakov Shafranovich <research(_at_)solidmatrix(_dot_)com> wrote
a message of 23 lines which said:
Then according to RFC 3668 we can safely ignore the IPR claims is
irrelevant and frivilous like it has been done before with IDN and
IPSec. Or can we?
Of course, nobody can be really sure.
IMHO, given the already existing statements by the Apache Foundation
or the Debian people, if we want these groups to deply SenderID, we
need a very clear statement for the IETF that the IETF regards this
patent claim as frivolous (because too trivial) and/or invalid
(because of prior art) and suggests they are ignored. Is there a
consensus in this WG to make such a statement?
Also, the big difference with IDN is not the validity of the patent
claim (they are both ridiculous) but the size of the company which
owns it. Despite what was being said here, we should not evaluate the
patent claim only on the basis of the licence terms. In the real
world, the size and the amount of rogueness already displayed by the
holder is much more important. I still believe the risk is too high.