----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <tbray@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "TS Glassey" <tglassey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "IETF Discussion"
<ietf@xxxxxxxx>; <ipr-wg@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2008 2:53 PM
Subject: Re: placing a dollar value on IETF IP.
Todd,
I generally agree with Tim that it would be difficult to put a value
on any IETF submission without an actual transfer of assets of some
sort to set a price.
The costs of replicating the works - say from a tech writer skilled in an
area is a reasonable place to start. Take the hourly rate and then multiply
that times the number of hours involved and the number of people.
I suggested that the unbundling of the R&D costs was appropriate since all
the IETF publishes is a set of document-standards per se.
However, in general, if a company feels that there is IPR value in
technology they are going to include in a submission (and this really
deals with ANY kind of standards submission, not just to the IETF),
How do you figure they 'deal' with how much it costs to send people to the
IETF several times a year. Also to cover the costs of their local
participation.
they will most probably submit a patent application prior to the
standards submission. So the existence of a patent declaration
accompanying the submission at least provides a clue that the
submitting company feels that there is some value there (else they
wouldn't have bothered with the patent application).
Only if there is a real program inside the Sponsor to accomplish that. This
is one of the issues in the IETF. There are many who are really enamored
with the idea that the IETF is a fraternal benevolent society rather than a
Intellectual Proeperty War Chest disguised cleverly as an International
Networking SDO.
However, a value generally can't be set until the company actually
starts to issue patent licenses. The value could be as little as zero
if no other companies feel compelled to license the technology.
As always, the "value of the workproduct", as you put it, is set by the
market.
But the costs of creating it are not. That was the point. The baseline is
the costs of replacing the written work.
Cheers,
Andy
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 11:42 AM, Tim Bray <tbray@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 8:27 AM, TS Glassey <tglassey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Since there is now a specific value estimated by the LINUX community at
1.4B
for the kernel itself
Hey, I've done an analysis and found that my toenail clippings are
worth $3.8762 billion. That kernel-valuation exercise is the silliest
kind of science fiction. Let me let you in on a little secret:
Everything in the world has a value, and that value is exactly what
people are prepared to pay for it. No more, no less.
On payment of a generous consulting fee, I would be delighted to
"estimate a specific value" for any given RFC or even I-D. I'll even
issue gold-framed certificates you can mount on the wall. -Tim
, the IETF can no longer hide its head in the sand
claiming that its workproduct has no specific value. This also means
that
ANY AND ALL contributions to the IETF no matter when they happened now
need
to be formally acknowledged for their financial value at the time of
their
contribution.
This is not an OPTION.
Todd Glassey
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.8.3/1745 - Release Date: 10/25/2008
9:53 AM
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf