Subject: RE: Sender-ID licensing issue and French law

From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 16:27:03 -0700

The position of the IETF has usually been to ignore national laws
when making standards on the grounds that with 180+ different
sources it is impossible to do so.

In this particular case I don't think that the issue is being raised
in good faith. It is reasonable to ask Microsoft to clarify the 
licensing terms, it is not reasonable to argue that the working 
assumption should be that the terms offered will be unreasonable.
Bringing up the topic repeatedly is completely unreasonable.

As the chairs have pointed out, this is a matter for the IPR working 
group.

---

From: Shevek <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 01:19:31 +0100 (BST)

> Bringing up the topic repeatedly is completely unreasonable.

The situation is that the terms ARE unreasonable or inappropriate, and
clear justification for this argument has been given by Wayne and Michel.
This is not a "working assumption". This is a clearly stated and justified
argument. It is also specific to this case.

This makes the topic relevant.

> As the chairs have pointed out, this is a matter for the IPR working 
  
I am happy to wait for the comments from the lawyers, but I am not happy
to see the issue swept under the carpet. "IPR claims should never be
disregarded without good cause."

S.

-- 
Shevek                                    http://www.anarres.org/
I am the Borg.                         http://www.gothnicity.org/