Re: A priori IPR choices

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

 



On Wednesday 24 October 2007 06:50, Norbert Bollow wrote:
> Scott Kitterman <scott@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > And that will never fly (IANAL) with the GPL and so here we sit at an
> > impasse again.  So either a GPL implementation is important to
> > interoperability in a given space or it is not.  If it is important to
> > interoperabilty, then this is a showstopper.  If not, maybe not.
>
> Do you have any specific example of an internet standard for which you
> think that lack of GPL-compatible licensing of any (perhaps just
> hypothetical) relevant patents would not cause interoperability serious
> problems if the patent holder chose to aggressive enforce the terms of
> that non-GPL-compatible patent license?
>
No.  My point was that for the IETF, interoperability is the goal, not some 
general statement about goodness of Free software.  In many/most/maybe all 
cases, this will require any IPR restrictions to be GPL compatible.

Scott K

_______________________________________________

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]