Michael Dillon <wavetossed at googlemail dot com> wrote:
Therefore, why not proactively consult the FSF on any standards track > document that makes use of patented material? Proactively drive the > dialogue by getting the FSF involved at an early stage, and by > providing a separate mailing list (ietf-comments) for discussing the > IPR issues. Over time, the FSF folks will better understand how the > IETF deals with IPR and will see that there is rarely the possibility > of a serious problem.
This is unlikely to result in a workable compromise, since the FSF has a fundamental belief that software patents are never acceptable, and the IETF has taken the position that in certain situations they are acceptable. This is the sort of roadblock faced by international diplomats trying to negotiate peaceful coexistence between two nations, one of whom has a fundamental belief that the other has no right to exist. --Doug Ewell * Thornton, Colorado, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14http://www.ewellic.orghttp://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.htmlhttp://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages ˆ _______________________________________________Ietf mailing listIetf@xxxxxxxxxxxxx://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf