Re: When is using patented technology appropriate?

[Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf at mit.edu>]

>>>>> "Ted" == Ted Hardie <hardie at qualcomm.com> writes:

    >>  It seems to me that in some sense that disclosing a patent
    >> should not make us less willing to use something.  This is
    >> especially true when the disclosing party is not obligated to
    >> make the disclosure.  Disclosing a patent along with an
    >> implication that the patent will be enforced or that the patent
    >> is high value should make us less willing to use a technology.
    >> I'll even except that absent royalty-free licensing a typical
    >> patent disclosure has the implication of desire to enforce the
    >> patent.

    Ted> I think it is very dangerous to infer anything like "desire
    Ted> to enforce the patent".  These are situations where you
    Ted> actually have to read the specifics to know what it is going.


You are probably right.  However I feel there is something
pathalogical going on in the open source community surrounding
patents.  People are willing to use technologies that probably have
patents but are unwilling to use technologies that clearly have
patents and that have a long track record of not particularly being
enforced.  I get From ietf-bounces at ietf.org Tue Oct 23 16:56:07 2007
Return-path: <ietf-bounces at ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com)
	by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1IkQgR-0002wT-RY; Tue, 23 Oct 2007 16:49:03 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org)
	by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IkQgP-0002tj-Iw
	for ietf at ietf.org; Tue, 23 Oct 2007 16:49:01 -0400
Received: from ithilien.qualcomm.com ([129.46.51.59])
	by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IkQgJ-0004ki-B1
	for ietf at ietf.org; Tue, 23 Oct 2007 16:49:01 -0400
Received: from totoro.qualcomm.com (totoro.qualcomm.com [129.46.61.158])
	by ithilien.qualcomm.com (8.13.6/8.12.5/1.0) with ESMTP id
	l9NKmjfQ018088
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL);
	Tue, 23 Oct 2007 13:48:46 -0700
Received: from [98.207.5.180] (vpn-10-50-16-8.qualcomm.com [10.50.16.8])
	by totoro.qualcomm.com (8.13.6/8.13.6/1.0) with ESMTP id l9NKmg91017593;
	Tue, 23 Oct 2007 13:48:43 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <p06240603c3440d20ebcf at [98.207.5.180]>
In-Reply-To: <tsllk9tlgc3.fsf at mit.edu>
References: <E1IaIjf-0008OK-Bi at megatron.ietf.org>
	<2788466ED3E31C418E9ACC5C31661557084ED4 at mou1wnexmb09.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com>
	<4717D090.1000908 at gmail.com> <18199.55877.791858.498365 at swbmbp.local>
	<03d501c811dc$031404a0$6401a8c0 at LROSENTOSHIBA>
	<p06240808c33dc38ec92e at [165.227.249.203]>
	<877iljv6ed.fsf at mocca.josefsson.org>
	<p06240803c33e8050e171 at [10.20.30.150]>
	<042201c8128a$63a1e400$6401a8c0 at LROSENTOSHIBA>
	<p0624060bc33ec526a5bc at [98.207.5.180]>
	<p0624060cc33ed2cad848 at [98.207.5.180]>
	<2788466ED3E31C418E9ACC5C31661557084EE8 at mou1wnexmb09.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com>
	<471A5668.8060505 at gmail.com>
	<048d01c81388$5230a9a0$6401a8c0 at LROSENTOSHIBA>
	<EF365B8911172B4918851DC9 at p3.JCK.COM>
	<20071022195723.4D9A22202DA at quill.bollow.ch>
	<B1A7CD91795D1BAB0F969EDB at p3.JCK.COM>
	<20071023105651.8D9AC2202DA at quill.bollow.ch>
	<87abqa2i1z.fsf at mocca.josefsson.org> <tslk5pdmz02.fsf at mit.edu>
	<p06240601c34405fd3f7c at [98.207.5.180]> <tsllk9tlgc3.fsf at mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 13:48:40 -0700
To: Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf at mit.edu>
From: Ted Hardie <hardie at qualcomm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----)
X-Scan-Signature: ea4ac80f790299f943f0a53be7e1a21a
Cc: Simon Josefsson <simon at josefsson.org>, ietf at ietf.org
Subject: Re: A priori IPR choices [Re: Third Last  
 Call:draft-housley-tls-authz-extns]
X-BeenThere: ietf at ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>,
	<mailto:ietf-request at ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf at ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request at ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>,
	<mailto:ietf-request at ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ietf-bounces at ietf.org

At 4:35 PM -0400 10/23/07, Sam Hartman wrote:
>
>my assumption is that our standards that are useful tend to be useful
>in open-source environments.  And that people should at least stop and
>think if there is not an OS implementation of a standard.  We might
>find a few areas (MPLS and CCAMP spring to mind) where it is quite
>clear that no such desire to implement exists even though there are
>significant other implementations. 

Interestingly, I was also thinking of CCAMP and MPLS when I was
coming up with examples.  There may well be others, though, where
the open-source implementations have a comparatively small impact on the
actual deployments even though they clearly exist; BGP, for example,
might fit into that category.  The bigger point, though, is that there are
now and likely will be in the future some technologies that are worth
IETF time and effort even if they don't appeal to the open source
community as projects (or even if the open source community projects
will have little deployment). 



>We == those interested in this idea.  I'm sorry that I failed to make
>it clear I'm speaking only for myself and especially not for the IESG.
>
>--worried when I see that spilling into the IETF.

Speaking for myself,

--Sam


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf





Sam

Thank you for your clarification.  I, as well, am speaking only for myself.

				regards,
					Ted

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf