Subject: Re: [TLS] Last Call: draft-ietf-tls-extractor (Keying MaterialExporters for Transport Layer Security (TLS)) to Proposed Standard
From: "Lawrence Rosen" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>, "'Wes Beebee \(wbeebee\)'" <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 11:41:58 -0700
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <tls.ietf.org>

I agree completely with Richard Stallman's responses to an earlier email. I
repeat the relevant parts of that earlier exchange below. This reflects a
basic policy that should be adopted by IETF. 
/Larry Rosen

********************* Email from RMS:

If you are claiming that one additional software patent can result in fewer
software patent infringement lawsuits, indeed that can sometimes be true.
But lawsuits are just the tip of the iceberg of the danger of patents.

When people decide not to distribute a program, or not to implement a
feature, because they fear they would be sued, no lawsuit occurs, but the
patent has done harm.

      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.

IETF should use this leverage to refuse to issue a standard unless the
companies in question allow it to be freely implemented and used.

      In some cases, the IETF may
    choose to adopt a patent-encumbered standard simply because it's
    technically superior to other options

That is an example of what not to do.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
Richard Stallman
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 9:37 PM
To: Wes Beebee (wbeebee)
Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [TLS] Last Call: draft-ietf-tls-extractor (Keying
MaterialExporters for Transport Layer Security (TLS)) to Proposed Standard
<snip>