On Fri, 15 Oct 2004, Eric S. Raymond wrote: > Pekka Savola <pekkas@xxxxxxxxxx>: > > Hmm.. Being an OSS/FSF enthusiast myself, I'm not sure if the last > > requirement, about code re-use, is a strict requirement. Sure, it > > would be nice if there wasn't such a thing, but it would seem to be > > better to get the first two points and fail at the third than get > > nothing at all. > > Think harder. The problem with area-of-application rules is isomorphic > to the "commercial/noncommercial" problem. The really nasty cases are > near service libraries. Maybe you should spell this out. For example, service libraries need not be a problem. Consider a service library which infringes a patent on SIP, which is to be restricted to interoperability with the SIP protocol. There is no issue if the service library is only useful with SIP, because all the use cases of the service library (excluding looking at the code and taking away the code) would be OK by the policy. Obviously, there is a problem if a patent claims to invent something commonplace such as 'xml', and grants its use only for the purpose of IETF standards or a specific standard. But I'm not sure if I recall something like that. -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf