Re: SUN Agreement

"Vinton G. Cerf" <0001050002@mcimail.com> Fri, 07 April 1995 12:02 UTC

Date: Fri, 07 Apr 1995 06:59:00 -0500
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: "Vinton G. Cerf" <0001050002@mcimail.com>
To: "Jeffrey I. Schiller" <jis@mit.edu>
Cc: iesg <iesg@CNRI.Reston.VA.US>
Subject: Re: SUN Agreement
Message-Id: <50950407115905/0001050002NA3EM@MCIMAIL.COM>

jeff,

no, they just mean that SUN isnt transferring their
implementations to ietf, just the specs. there is
an automatic, royalty-free, perpetual license granted
by SUN to anyone implementing the specs, according to
the agreement.

vint

>Date:     Thu Apr 6, 1995 01:21 pm EDT
>Source-Date: Thu, 6 Apr 1995 12:39:43 -0400
>From:     Jeffrey I. Schiller
>          EMS: INTERNET / MCI ID: 376-5414
>          MBX: jis@mit.edu
> 
>TO:     * Vinton G. Cerf / MCI ID: 105-0002
>CC:       iesg
>          EMS: INTERNET / MCI ID: 376-5414
>          MBX: iesg@cnri.reston.va.us
>Subject:  Re: SUN Agreement
>Message-Id: 54950406172145/0003765414DC4EM
>Source-Msg-Id: <aba9c99407021004d41a@[199.92.189.173]>
>U-Mime-Version: 1.0
>U-Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> 
>At 18:18 4/5/95, Vinton G. Cerf wrote:
>>I don't think the changes alter the basic intent - they
>>just clarify that only the specs and not the implementations
>>are being transferred.
>
>What does this mean? Specifically does this change imply that vendors who
>implement the specs might have to be individually licensed from Sun?
>
>                                -Jeff
>
>

SUN Agreement Vinton G. Cerf
Re: SUN Agreement Vinton G. Cerf
Re: SUN Agreement Paul Mockapetris
Re: SUN Agreement Vinton G. Cerf
Re: SUN Agreement Jeffrey I. Schiller
Re: SUN Agreement Jeffrey I. Schiller