Re: IPR at IETF 54

[Carsten Bormann <cabo at TZI.ORG>]

> ... we should prefer technology which will be available
> royalty-free, but that's not current policy

Whose policy?

Some WGs have a policy (or are actually chartered) to develop deployable 
protocols.  Where a legal issue would make a protocol non-deployable, we have to 
look elsewhere.  (Of course, that only applies to parts of the IETF -- maybe one 
reason why an IETF-wide policy may be harder to come up with than e.g. in the W3C.)

Oh, and I would rather avoid the confusing term royalty-free.  Imagine a 
"technology" that is licensed royalty-free to end-users (i.e., every single user 
has to pay a lawyer to get a license contract in place, which then is 
royalty-free).  Royalty-free, but useless.
Lawyer-free/paperwork-free would be the more useful criterion.

Gruesse, Carsten