Different era.
Today we have had several companies burnes for up to half a billion dollars
with piffle patents.
When tcpip was being written the patent office had not become a profit center,
the seven nos were still an issue.
Sent from my GoodLink Wireless Handheld (www.good.com)
-----Original Message-----
From: Brian E Carpenter
[mailto:brian(_dot_)e(_dot_)carpenter(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com]
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2007 12:26 PM Pacific Standard Time
To: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
Cc: Ted Hardie; lrosen(_at_)rosenlaw(_dot_)com; ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org;
Contreras, Jorge
Subject: Re: A priori IPR choices [Re: Third Last
Call:draft-housley-tls-authz-extns]
Phill,
If there were in addition some standard non disclosure contracts, standard
contracts for holding pre-standards meeting and the like the result could be
turned into a book which most managers in the valley would probably end up
buying.
Most of them, and those in Armonk that I used to work for, bought Section 10 of
RFC 2026 and its successors. Certainly, open
source was less of a factor when that regime was designed, but Linux still
supports TCP/IP as far as I know. So I think the
experimental evidence supports the arguments you're hearing from me, Ted and
others.
Don't confuse that with a liking for standards encumbered by patents with
expensive licensing conditions. It's simply a matter
of finding a pragmatic compromise in a world where software patents are
granted, and often upheld by the courts, so that the
goal of 100% unencumbered standards is unrealistic.
Brian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf