Re: A priori IPR choices

[Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch>]

Phillip Hallam-Baker <pbaker at verisign.com> wrote:

> I would accept GPL 2.0, but not GPL without any qualifier such that the
> IETF was required to comply with whatever scheme RMS has thought up this
> week to reinsert himself at the center of attention.

I wouldn't have any objections to a policy which establishes
the criterion of GPLv2 compatibility in addition to compatibility with
proprietary closed-source software.

It would IMO be better however to formulate the criterion in a way
which avoids explicitly mentioning GPLv2.  Rather, I would suggest
to adopt a policy formulation that tells as explicitly as possible
how to check whether the terms of a patent license or patent
non-assertion promise are acceptable.  

Greetings,
Norbert.


-- 
Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch>                      http://Norbert.ch
President of the Swiss Internet User Group SIUG    http://SIUG.ch
Working on establishing a non-corrupt and
truly /open/ international standards organization  http://OpenISO.org

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