John Levine wrote: > > In North America, at least, experimentation per se doesn't infringe > > patents. > > > > See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_exemption Once again, I wish non-lawyers would ask question before interpreting the patent law. The experimentation exception referred to in that wikipedia article [§271(e)(1) or "Hatch-Waxman" exemption] is largely relevant to pharmaceuticals in process of tests and experiments for regulatory approval. It has nothing whatsoever to do with software that doesn't get approved by anyone. Is that what IETF's "April Fools RFCs" are about? Perhaps drugs will improve Internet performance. It is worth an experiment.... Alessandro Vesely wrote: > This habit of requiring two lawyers and a judge > for every pair of citizens is really annoying. It is the main reason > for seeking unencumbered environments, IMHO. Software is complicated > enough already. Fortunately for all of us, there aren't quite that many lawyers. So practice your complicated engineering and let us lawyers do our job. /Larry > -----Original Message----- > From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of > Alessandro Vesely > Sent: Sunday, March 15, 2009 11:14 AM > To: John Levine > Cc: ietf@xxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: Consensus Call for draft-housley-tls-authz > > John Levine wrote: > >>Apparently, publishing a message as "experimental" is an invitation > >>by the IETF to experiment with a new protocol. What sense does that > >>bear, if accepting IETF invitations is likely to result in legal > >>troubles? > > > > In North America, at least, experimentation per se doesn't infringe > > patents. > > > > See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_exemption > > However, it is difficult to exactly trace a boundary between normal > exploitation of a patent and a strictly controlled experiment. For > example, I don't think that all the mail hubs currently using SPF > would be considered mere experiments, but SPF is still experimental. > > Of course, if publishing as experimental explicitly included licenses, > that idea might work. > > > Can we stop playing Junior Lawyer now, please? > > That's what I'd hope. This habit of requiring two lawyers and a judge > for every pair of citizens is really annoying. It is the main reason > for seeking unencumbered environments, IMHO. Software is complicated > enough already. > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf