Subject: Standards and patents

From: Samir Srivastava <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 23:07:33 -0700

Hi, Refer http://samirsrivastava.typepad.com for posting on Standards
And Patents. Copyright of posting on Standards And Patents is free for
personal usage. Arguments were presented in favour of that standards
and their usage should be free from patents. If standards are
patentable then mathematical / scientific theories ( innovation of the
perfection level) should be patentable also. IMHO after the
development of the baseline specifications we lack freedom to
standardize best. Standards are developed by community & for
community. There is no role of patent hunters in that. Comments /
flames on the blog or here are welcome. Regards Samir

---

From: Alessandro Vesely <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 13:18:39 +0200

On 27/Jul/11 08:07, Samir Srivastava wrote:
> Standards are developed by community & for community. There is no
> role of patent hunters in that.

I agree, with the exception of "defensive" patents, some of which are
announced with very elegant disclosures.  Let's draw a veil over
incomprehensible and confused disclosures, for now.  For the rest,
what is the purpose of standardizing a private walled garden?

---

From: Samir Srivastava <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 07:47:52 -0700

Hi, Thx for your comments. Private walled garden creates lots of
interoperabilty issues. In the long term with deployments in the
field, even after the expiry of patents we end up for a workable
solution to carry unnecessary burden. e.g. I 'GUESS' pains of htonl
etc are due to patents. IMHO we need to free human brain & cpu for
more important issues. It is not fair for people who work on
unpatented baselines specifications. What would have been situation if
IP header was patented? Thx Samir

On 7/27/11, Alessandro Vesely <[email-masked]> wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
>

---

From: Eric Burger <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 10:56:20 -0400

The patent would have expired by now?