From: Dave Crocker <dhc2(_at_)dcrocker(_dot_)net>
...
If the patent office staff and patent infringement defense attorneys had
searchable access to the database of Internet Drafts, their jobs would bne
easier and the quality of their work would improve.
That assumes facts not in evidence and even contrary to well known
evidence. Defense attorneys would have only a somewhat easier time of
it, but the outher side would gain even more. The defense can now ask
around quietly to find prior art. However if the other guys know what
you're going to say, your case can be lost. A concrete example of that
is what happened in the AT&T backing store patent fight. (Dave should
ask ex-employees of that graphics computer vendor for details, especially
those who worked with Phil Karlton.)
If the patent office staff can't be bothered to check textbooks, do you
really expect them to figure out how to search a mass of text like 1000's
of I-D's? If they issue patents on "hyper-light-speed" antennas (see
http://www.patents.ibm.com/details?&pn=US06025810__ ), can you really
expect them understand
draft-terrell-logic-analy-bin-ip-spec-ipv7-ipv8-*.txt?
I favor of an IETF archive of I-D's, because the current ad hoc network
of I-D archives is inconvenient to use and subject to manipulation. The
IETF's archive of I-D's could be relied upon more to be complete and to
contain unimproved text. In other words, if you've ever needed to find
an expired I-D, you know the the question of whether I-D's should be
archived has been moot for almost as long as have I-D's existed.
Vernon Schryver vjs(_at_)rhyolite(_dot_)com