Michael Dillon <wavetossed at googlemail dot com> wrote:
Therefore, why not proactively consult the FSF on any standards track
document that makes use of patented material? Proactively drive the
dialogue by getting the FSF involved at an early stage, and by
providing a separate mailing list (ietf-comments) for discussing the
IPR issues. Over time, the FSF folks will better understand how the
IETF deals with IPR and will see that there is rarely the possibility
of a serious problem.
This is unlikely to result in a workable compromise, since the FSF has a
fundamental belief that software patents are never acceptable, and the
IETF has taken the position that in certain situations they are
acceptable.
This is the sort of roadblock faced by international diplomats trying to
negotiate peaceful coexistence between two nations, one of whom has a
fundamental belief that the other has no right to exist.
--
Doug Ewell * Thornton, Colorado, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14
http://www.ewellic.org
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages ˆ
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf