[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Idr] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-idr-flow-spec-05.txt
On Mar 6, 2009, at 4:52 PM, John Leslie wrote:
IANAL, but
Nor am I of course, and in my experience the IETF is at its very worst
when engineers try to play lawyer. Although I'm not a lawyer I have
gotten opinions on a few things from counsel from time to time, one of
which I'll relate below.
I see nothing in there that looks like a license: it is rather a
promise not to sue under certain conditions.
Not being a lawyer I will not comment on the above other than to point
out that you aren't either. If someone wants to make a decision based
on allegations that the IPR disclosure language does or doesn't have
certain consequences, or is or isn't a "license", IMO they would do
well to do so based on a competent legal opinion.
IMHO, while Juniper's current language may or may not be the best
we can hope for, it simply isn't a royalty-free license.
Same comment applies -- I respectfully don't wish to rely on your
opinion on technical legal matters, of which this is one.
While I dislike playing lawyer games,
In that case I suggest you get an opinion from a competent lawyer
instead of, as you put it, playing lawyer games.
It's not that I expect Juniper managment to become unreasonable:
I don't expect them to file litigation over this. It's what happens
when companies enter bankruptcy: a whole new set of lawyers take
over, interested _only_ in maximizing the value against which they
can charge for what lawyers do -- and not the least bit interested
in carrying on the original vision of the company's founders.
This is the part I actually got opinion from counsel over. Their
opinion was that Juniper's public commitments to the IETF would
continue to be binding on successors. Thus it is not a matter of
simply having to trust in the good will of the (hypothetical)
successor -- there's a binding, written legal commitment. Get your
own legal opinion if it's sufficiently important to you, of course.
In today's times, any company faces increased risk of bankruptcy.
And it doesn't need to be Jupiter: any two-bit company can start
the meltdown by filing patent-infringement litigation. Any other
company can contribute to the meltdown by exercising the rights
reserved in IPR claims like Jupiter's.
I think you meant Juniper, not Jupiter, but whoever you meant, what
some hypothetical third party ("two-bit company") might or might not
do seems irrelevant to the case under discussion.
--John