Subject: Future risks in IPR+RF licensing?

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 10:15:27 +0200 (EET)

Hi,

I sent a message in a similar vein some months ago, but let's try an 
another approach.

Clearly, no IPR is better than IPR with RF licensing.

However, as we live in the real world, IPR w/ RF seem to be inevitable.

Then, the question becomes, are there any significant drabacks to IPR w/
RF. (As an example case with additional text on reciprocity, one could
consider RFC1822.)

One possibility would come to mind.  What happens if the organization 
assuring RF licensing either:

 1) changes its mind and says "no RF no more, pay up!"
 2) changes its mind, says "the person making the licensing promise was 
not authorized to do so, it is not binding.  No RF no more, pay up!".
 3) sells the IPR off to someone else who then says "no RF no more, pay 
up!"
 4) goes bankrupt/merges with a company who then says "no RF no more, pay 
up!"

Cases 1) and 2) seem similar, and 3) and 4) as well, respectively.

What might be the outcome in these cases?

(The bottom line is that if we accept IPR w/ RF, we should try to work 
hard on making sure there are no loopholes there, and that we would have 
worked out an optimal licensing wordings to minimize the _future_ risks.)

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

_______________________________________________
Ipr-wg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg