The result of the FSF campaign has been to raise a legal concern obviously
important to many of us: Will users of the proposed IETF TLS specification
require patent licenses from RedPhone to use such implementations in the US
or elsewhere?
I don't yet know the answer to this question. Does anyone here?
Several emails here have valiantly attempted to get us to focus on the
technical aspects of the RedPhone patent claims, the progress of the patent
in the PTO and PCT, and other technical issues. Speaking only for myself, I
haven't yet seen any justification for us fearing the RedPhone patent
claims. They may be as bogus as the hundreds of other patent infringement
claims that companies receive letters about every day. OTOH, they may be
deadly submarines ready to attack us all.
Why don't we organize to answer the patent claim infringement issues like
professionals do? Ask technical experts. Consult a patent attorney. Render
expert opinions.
And thank those from FSF and elsewhere who have written here to encourage us
to do so! If the TLS specification really is patent-encumbered, in the
professional view of experts who have reason to understand the details, my
vote here and those of many FSF members and FOSS advocates too will be to
have nothing more to do with it.
/Larry
Lawrence Rosen
Rosenlaw & Einschlag, a technology law firm (www.rosenlaw.com)
3001 King Ranch Road, Ukiah, CA 95482
707-485-1242 * cell: 707-478-8932 * fax: 707-485-1243
Skype: LawrenceRosen
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf