At 08:12 PM 5/29/02 -0500, Pete Resnick wrote: >And overall I'm pretty darn sick and tired of wasting my time in WG/BOF sessions where all I get is a series of undiscussed presentations that could have been done in I-Ds which I could have read before the meeting. So don't go to the session. One thing that's pretty clear is 1) that there's a problem, and 2) nobody's exactly certain what the problem is. I don't think that putting some effort into trying to scope the problem is a bad idea. Here's one for starters: there's no guidance on how or whether to treat differences in licensing terms for competing proposals. It would be nice to be able to say that all other things being more-or- less equal we should prefer technology which will be available royalty-free, but that's not current policy and I have absolutely no clue if there are legal problems with doing it. (It might also help damp some conduct problems that are arising out of people being overly enthusiastic in promoting their encumbered technology.) I wouldn't expect questions like that to be answered at an IPR session, but I hope that issues like it will be raised. Melinda