Re: [hrpc] Patents in draft-tenoever-hrpc-research-05

[Niels ten Oever <[e-mail]>]

Hi Andrew,


On 09/19/2016 09:21 AM, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 05:13:56PM +1200, Niels ten Oever wrote:
>> The question does not say one should not implement because of patents
>> but asks whether the patent 'would prevent your standard from being
>> fully implemented'. So it asks whether the limits the use (which is not
>> necessarily the case).
> 
> I think the question goes sort of to the heart of who we think the
> audience is.  If the goal is for individuals to consider these
> considerations (which is I think formally what the document says) then
> I don't (speaking personally) have a concern about this question.
> 

This is exactly what it aims to do.

> If the practical goal, however, is actually to influence the way the
> IETF or WGs or something make decisions about these matters, then I
> think Stephane's point is that IPR generally is an issue the IETF has
> wrestled with, and it has come out on the side of not taking a
> position on these matters.  The question above militates against
> taking that non-position, and that might be reason to worry a little
> about this discussion.
> 

Would you have a language suggestion which would help people interpret
this question? I thought the references to RFC3979 RFC6701 would help
reiterate the former reading.

Best,

Niels

> Best regards,
> 
> A
>