Re: [TLS] [Ietf-honest] Last Call: draft-ietf-tls-extractor (Keying

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

Todd and all,

  All good points here!  Well done!  >:)

-----Original Message-----
>From: Todd Glassey <[e-mail]>
>Sent: Sep 18, 2009 9:23 AM
>To: Erick O <[e-mail]>
>Cc: Dean Anderson <[e-mail]>, [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]
>Subject: Re: [Ietf-honest] [TLS] Last Call: draft-ietf-tls-extractor (Keying
>
>Erick O wrote:
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *From:* Martin Rex <[e-mail]>
>> *To:* Dean Anderson <[e-mail]>
>> *Cc:* [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
>> *Sent:* Thursday, July 23, 2009 2:34:16 PM
>> *Subject:* Re: [TLS] [Ietf-honest] Last Call: draft-ietf-tls-extractor 
>> (Keying
>>
>> Dean Anderson wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > This is a problem. The official statement is the IPR disclosure, which
>> > should contain the terms used by the IETF in its decision to approve the
>> > document.
>Dan - the IPR notice is a statement of the ownership of the IP and 
>NOTHING MORE. It is NOT a contractual grant of anything. It is not 
>authenticated and the process doesnt meet any legal requirements in the 
>real world for transferring commercial rights to anyone for anything.
>> Certicom should not be able to alter the terms after the fact,
>> > which it seems to have just admitted doing.
>Wrong - Certichron can alter anything it wants after informing the IETF 
>of its (Certichron's) ownership of those technologies.
>
>The IETF's decision to allow a standard or not based on whether the IETF 
>is given ownership of the IP implementing that standard in the real 
>world in the standard is a form of blackmail and needs to be formally 
>prosecuted as tortuous interference and antitrust IMHO.
>>
>> The IETF is NOT asking for an irrevocable "Grant" in an IPR disclosure.
>>
>> The problem here is that submitting an URL for the real IPR disclosure
>> in the IETF disclosure form is subverting to idea that the IETF
>> can archive the IPR disclosures in their original form.
>Yes but that's the flaw in the IETF's system.
>>
>>
>> >
>> > I think that we have to consider rejecting documents where the terms are
>> > not definite and/or can be altered at the whim of the patent holder.
>>
>> Copyright terms stick to the published text or code when they're
>> published (under the condition they're rightfully issued).
>>
>>
>> AFAIK, License grants for patents are rarely issued as "irrevocable",
>> which means that the terms can be cancelled/terminated.
>Yep...
>>
>>
>> -Martin
>> _______________________________________________
>> TLS mailing list
>> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
>> Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.104/2379 - Release Date: 09/17/09 15:55:00
>>
>>   
>
>_______________________________________________
>Ietf-honest mailing list
>[e-mail]
>http://lists.iadl.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-honest

Regards,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"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]
Phone: [phone]