Harald Alvestrand <harald@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Simon Josefsson wrote: >> Harald Alvestrand <harald@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> >> At least one of the removed patent licenses promises to make available >> patent licenses on fair, reasonable, reciprocal and non-discriminatory >> terms. It seems unfortunate that IETF allows organizations to file such >> claims and permits them be removed later, presumably when the >> organization change their minds. > Agreed in principle. > > On the other hand (trying to play devil's advocate), if the promise > was made by someone in the organization that did not have authority to > commit the organization to that statement, I could see why the > responsible persons for that organization would want the original > statement made invisible, so as to not have to eternally go around and > explain the situation..... What if the request to remove the disclosure was filed by someone who isn't authorized to do it? If the IETF removes patent disclosures, I believe the IETF will find itself in the position of evaluating the _correctness_ of patent related claims. This seems like the wrong approach. One way to mitigate your problem without getting into evaluating correctness or removing disclosures would be to collect all patent disclosures updates on the same page as the original patent disclosure, and sort the entries in reverse calendar order. Then anyone can add note that a disclosure below was filed without authority. That disclosure can be evaluated for correctness the same way that other disclosures can be evaluated. Removing disclosures makes it impossible for IETF participants to evaluate the contents for themselves. /Simon _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf