Re: Fourth Last Call: draft-housley-tls-authz-extns

>>>>> "Dean" == Dean Anderson <dean@av8.com> writes:

    Dean> 3. --There have been reports of similar issues in recent
    Dean> lawsuit where the plaintiff patent-holder acted similarly to
    Dean> Housley/Brown/Polk et al and was found to have engaged in
    Dean> "aggravated litigation abuse". In that case, the Judge ruled
    Dean> the patents unenforceable as a penalty for the deception of
    Dean> the standards body in that case.  (see
    Dean> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipr-wg/current/msg05089.html
    Dean> and http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions/07-1545.pdf)

Dean, it seems to me that if the patents are not enforceable then
there is no impediment to standardization.  Help me understand how
this is a reason not to publish rather than an argument that
Redphone's IPR position is weaker than otherwise expected and thus it
might be more reasonable to publish.

    Dean> 4. --There is no community consensus to proceed, nor any
    Dean> demand from the community to have this protocol
    Dean> standardized.

I think there is a desire from the community for a solution to the
problem that this solved.

Didn't Simon work on an implementation before the IPR concerns came up?
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf