Re: [TLS] [Ietf-honest] Last Call: draft-ietf-tls-extractor (KeyingMaterialExporters for Transport Layer Security (TLS)) toProposed Standard

["Jeffrey A. Williams" <[e-mail]>]

Wes and all,

  Not entirely true here.  First use in commerce supersedes any
patent if the person of a product that didn't file a patent for it has
used it in commerce before another and can prove such that is
patenting the product or similar even some types of service has filed
the patent and it has been approved.  The problem with this scenario
is that one may not even know even with a through patent search if
such a patent has been filed, not to mention when, and so legal proceedings
may ensue as a result, costing both litigants significant $$.

  Standards should only set basic parameters by which any number
of products, in this fora a security product of some sort.  Products that
exceed the standard parameters should than be considered standardized.
Any standard that is set that does not is a bad standard.

"Wes Beebee (wbeebee)" wrote:

> Many patents are filed for defensive reasons.  Ie. If I don't patent it,
> then someone else will, and then I won't be able to use the idea I came
> up with.  The other defensive reason is so that if company A tries to
> sue company B for infringing patents, then company B can threaten to sue
> company A back - and the end result of the mutual assured destruction is
> that no one ends up suing anyone else.  In other words, patents can
> actually reduce the number of law suits out there.  In many cases,
> patents are filed long before the technology is standardized - and, if
> disclosed properly through the IETF process, can be weighed when
> determining whether to adopt a standard.  In some cases, the IETF may
> choose to adopt a patent-encumbered standard simply because it's
> technically superior to other options - and because the encumberence is
> not judged to be too much of a barrier to adoption.  One great way to
> find out if the patent is too much of a barrier would be to label the
> technology as "Experimental" with the experiment being whether anybody
> would implement it given the patent encumberence, and if enough people
> can implement it, striking the right deals, then the technology can move
> onto the standards track.
>
> - Wes
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of
> Richard Stallman
> Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 9:38 PM
> To: Nicolas Williams
> Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail];
> [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [TLS] Last Call: draft-ietf-tls-extractor (Keying
> MaterialExporters for Transport Layer Security (TLS)) to Proposed
> Standard
>
>     The operative word here is uncertainty.  A patent-holder creates
>     uncertainty.  How should an SDO respond?  I'm not sure.  I'm only
> sure
>     that I don't like getting DoSed, either into dropping a standard or
> into
>     not implementing it for fear of infringing.
>
> That's the nature of software patents: each one denies people the
> freedom to write and run certain kinds of software.  This is why we must
> abolish software patents.
>
> Until we succeed in doing that, we can resist in certain ways.  One of
> them is to refuse to establish standards that encourage their use.
>
> Generally speaking, standards are useful, because they enable people to
> converge what they are doing.  But that ceases to be true when the use
> of the standard is patented.  It is better to have no standard than have
> a standard that invites people into danger.
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-honest mailing list
> [e-mail]
> http://lists.iadl.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-honest

Regards,

Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 284k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln
"YES WE CAN!"  Barack ( Berry ) Obama

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.
div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
[e-mail]
My Phone: [phone]