Lawrence Rosen wrote:
Keith Moore wrote:
For several reasons, it is difficult to imagine an IETF-wide procedure
that allows the existence of a patent to trump other considerations of
protocol feasibility and deployability:
Who suggested otherwise? It is not the existence of the patent that matters,
but its unavailability under license terms that allow implementation in
*any* software.
_and_ its validity, _and_ its applicability, both of which can be
subjective and difficult to determine conclusively without long delays
and excessive expense. so we have to make judgments. and by "we" I
mean individuals participating in IETF, not IETF itself.
The more feasible and deployable the protocol, the more important will be
FOSS implementations.
only relative to other protocols in the same space.
granted that patents are the bane of any open standards-making
organization, because patents do exactly the opposite of what open
standards do. at the same time, we can't let FUD about patents become a
denial of service attack to IETF efforts.
Keith
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf