IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Niels ten Oever <niels@article19.org> Mon, 19 September 2016 05:14 UTC

Return-Path: <niels@article19.org>
X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1738612B037 for <hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 22:14:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.121
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.121 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vX3ijajsxK6p for <hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 22:13:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.article19.io (vps784.greenhost.nl [213.108.108.114]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C8B1112B008 for <hrpc@irtf.org>; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 22:13:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.article19.io (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.article19.io (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ADC702400BC for <hrpc@irtf.org>; Mon, 19 Sep 2016 05:13:57 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail.article19.io (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.article19.io (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9DC9881A5 for <hrpc@irtf.org>; Mon, 19 Sep 2016 05:13:57 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [192.168.1.71] (sd5112335.adsl.online.nl [213.17.35.53]) by mail.article19.io (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 906FF2400BC for <hrpc@irtf.org>; Mon, 19 Sep 2016 05:13:57 +0000 (UTC)
To: hrpc@irtf.org
References: <20160918193829.GA27308@sources.org>
From: Niels ten Oever <niels@article19.org>
X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110
Message-ID: <3112c805-66db-ed18-9f0f-42137938db80@article19.org>
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 17:13:56 +1200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20160918193829.GA27308@sources.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="HpX6fkHk1hh8ieCsVm6QlfOQ58bJPIOj5"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hrpc/tSIZxDvk2wOBSUd2zXK5doOzg0M>
Subject: Re: [hrpc] Patents in draft-tenoever-hrpc-research-05
X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "niels@article19.org" <hrpc.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/hrpc>, <mailto:hrpc-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/hrpc/>
List-Post: <mailto:hrpc@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hrpc-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc>, <mailto:hrpc-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 05:14:00 -0000

Hi Stephane,

First of all, thanks a lot for your extensive review! It was really
helpful. I agreed with all point, except for this one, so let's discuss:


On 09/19/2016 07:38 AM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> Section 5.3.2.1.7 says:
> 
>> Are you aware of any patents that would prevent your standard from
>> being fully implemented?
> 
> First, this is already covered in length in other IETF documents (RFC
> 3979, RFC 6701, etc) note wells and things like that. And it is well
> implemented by the tools we use, such as the datatracker. IMHO, we
> could simply drop this sentence: the average RFC author is already
> well aware there are issus with patents.

True, but also other issues that are documented have been discussed in
the draft. Patents can have an impact on human rights, so why not
mentioned them?

> 
> If we insist on keeping it, I would disagree with it because it seems
> to imply we should not standardize patented technologies. If so, we
> would standardize nothing: almost every sensible algorithm is
> patented. Most (all?) software patents are futile and groundless (not
> to mention the fact they are valid only in some countries). If we take
> them at face value, we would tie our hands.
> 
> 

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've added a reference to RFC3979 and EFC6701, hope that helps.

Happy to discuss and thanks again for your review!

Best,

Niels

> _______________________________________________
> hrpc mailing list
> hrpc@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email