"Joel M. Halpern" <jmh(_at_)joelhalpern(_dot_)com> writes:
We have published encumbered experimental and informational
documents on many occasions. I can see no reason not to do so in
this case.
The reasons are the same as they have always been. Making a mistake in
the past is no reason to continue making that same mistake.
Software idea patents place control over *every* independent
implementation of an idea in the hands of *one* entity, who then gets
to dictate whatever terms they like. This is unjust, and is a
practical hindrance on every software developer since it adds to the
minefield of ideas that they must avoid using when designing their
code.
Even developers who are not intending to use ideas encumbered by a
particular patent can independently arrive at some specific method
described in that patent, and inadvertantly violate the patent
rules. In such cases the violation will not be discovered for some
unknown amount of time. The burden on software developers thus mounts
with every patent on a software idea.
To allow a technology, encumbered by any known patent holder's
monopoly, as a proposed standard (even experimental or informational
or any other status) is to give legitimacy to this system that
directly harms development of all software, and especially harms the
goal of interoperability that is part of the purpose of a standards
process.
Please explicitly reject technologies from any part of the standards
process that are encumbered by software idea patents. I encourage the
IETF to start by rejecting 'draft-housley-tls-authz-extns'.
--
\ "Holy bouncing boiler-plated fits, Batman!" -- Robin |
`\ |
_o__) |
Ben Finney
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf