Harald Alvestrand <harald(_at_)alvestrand(_dot_)no> writes:
Simon Josefsson wrote:
Harald Alvestrand <harald(_at_)alvestrand(_dot_)no> writes:
At least one of the removed patent licenses promises to make available
patent licenses on fair, reasonable, reciprocal and non-discriminatory
terms. It seems unfortunate that IETF allows organizations to file such
claims and permits them be removed later, presumably when the
organization change their minds.
Agreed in principle.
On the other hand (trying to play devil's advocate), if the promise
was made by someone in the organization that did not have authority to
commit the organization to that statement, I could see why the
responsible persons for that organization would want the original
statement made invisible, so as to not have to eternally go around and
explain the situation.....
What if the request to remove the disclosure was filed by someone who
isn't authorized to do it?
If the IETF removes patent disclosures, I believe the IETF will find
itself in the position of evaluating the _correctness_ of patent related
claims. This seems like the wrong approach.
One way to mitigate your problem without getting into evaluating
correctness or removing disclosures would be to collect all patent
disclosures updates on the same page as the original patent disclosure,
and sort the entries in reverse calendar order. Then anyone can add
note that a disclosure below was filed without authority. That
disclosure can be evaluated for correctness the same way that other
disclosures can be evaluated. Removing disclosures makes it impossible
for IETF participants to evaluate the contents for themselves.
/Simon
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf