Brian E Carpenter wrote:
IANAL, but it's my understanding that the prominently displayed Note Well
text already serves this purpose. The real sanction can only be having
a patent struck down by the courts due to intentional failure to
disclose it; all the IETF can do is to make its rules clear enough
for the courts to be able to make such a finding.
...
I don't see what we need to change. As the current case shows,
we know how to rescind a standards action if appropriate.
IALOAL (I am less of a lawyer) but what you say makes complete sense to me
(which probably should worry folks.)
IETF actions: Note Well note, and later possibility of rescinding standards
status.
Legal action (by others): Use of Note Well, etc. as input to suit against patent.
The only issue that occurs to me is the difference between Historic vs.
Experimental/Informational. The only reason it might be worthy of discussion
is the possible legal impact. I could imagine that Historic would be a more
clear bit of input to the legal process...
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf