Re: Putting IPR on IPFIX while the target of IPFIX is to in effect open NetFlow

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



[Not speaking in any way for Cisco on this issue...]

Simon Josefsson wrote:

Such clauses may be acceptable when we know what the patent is, and what
it covers, but this refer to unpublished patent applications.  This
particular license also explicitly enable Cisco to collect retroactive
royalties against anyone who sues Cisco over _any_ patent.
I don't believe these are acceptable terms for a Standards Track
document.

Just imagine the number of lawsuits that would exist if everyone did things this way. Stallman should be jealous.

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]