|
Dear Sir / Madam, I am writing to you to humbly request that you do not grant a patent to RedPhone Security for TLS Authorisation. It seems to me that it is rapidly becoming the "norm" for patents to be filed for technologies that are already in use (and well established within the IT community), and upon which certain areas of the IT community depend. No matter how significantly (or insignificantly) a technology is used, it is not morally just to grant said patents. As more and more patents of this nature tend to be granted, the IT community finds itself more and more constrained. Over time, two extreme outcomes develop; everyone drops the use of such technology (if possible) to avoid any possible conflicts or licensing issues (so everyone loses, including the patent holder), or those who need to employ said technology have increased costs to meet licensing fees which are inevitably passed on to the consumer. Also, the concepts of "open source" and "free software" become varyingly more difficult to implement, as technology / code either need to be omitted, or made available via some sort of "closed" third-party extra, usually with unneccessary incurred costs. I personally feel as if we are using the patent mechanism in far too many situations, in order for someone to have the retrospective opportunity "to make a quick buck". I also believe I do understand and accept the need for a patent mechanism, but I do not believe that it can always be usefully applied, and I believe this is one such occasion. I suppose a fallback compromise would be for RedPhone to grant a royalty-free perpetual license, if their patent application was approved, but this is not ideal, and may still incur some sort of restrictions and / or penalties. Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. Best regards, Mike Ellis |
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf