I agree with Brian and Marshall, but let me introduce a different
perspective on the issue.
Marshall Eubanks wrote:
[...]
I don't see any sensible way you get from the [Brian interprtetation] to the
[FSF interpretation].
Maybe it's a matter of ideological objection to patents. Engineering is
not always rational, ideology sneaks in in various ways, sometimes under
the name ethic.
So you see a bunch of instantaneous IETF volunteers who whish to bring a
consensus based on some form of ethic (as they see it, I presume). What
can the IETF do? Is there some obscure provision in IETF processes that
can turn down participation based on manifest ideological grounds that
do not resist analysis from another perspective?
Incidentally, it is intriguing to see the FSF deeply rooted in the
Copyright foundation (Berne convention) for ensuring legal protection of
intellectual property, and at the same time so ideologically opposed to
the patent foundation (Paris convention). But at this point, it becomes
useless to argue with them about patents.
Some form of procedural integrity should be sought by the IETF if there
is anything to be salvaged after being victimized by instantaneous
volunteering based on ideological grounds.
Good luck!
--
- Thierry Moreau
CONNOTECH Experts-conseils inc.
9130 Place de Montgolfier
Montreal, Qc
Canada H2M 2A1
Tel.: (514)385-5691
Fax: (514)385-5900
web site: http://www.connotech.com
e-mail: thierry.moreau@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf