Dean, Paul, and all, Sorry Paul but in this instance I have to agree with Dean, I didn't see anything in his previous remarks that constituted legal advice, and I DO have a law degree but do not practice law. I also agree with Deans previous remarks that the standard indeed is patent incumbered. Such incumbrences may/will price many small companies out of the market which is not a economically or socially healthy thing. Dean Anderson wrote: > On Tue, 21 Jul 2009, Paul Hoffman wrote: > > > At 3:15 PM -0400 7/20/09, Dean Anderson wrote: > > >I am against this standard because of its patent encumbrances and > > >non-free licencing terms. > > > > In the past, I think that Dean Anderson has stated that he is not a > > lawyer (although I can't find the specific reference). Note that the > > statement above is legal advice: he is saying that a particular > > protocol is encumbered. Readers of this thread may or may not want to > > listen to his legal advice. > > My statement above is not legal advice. I am not a lawyer, and have not > claimed to be a lawyer. I am the President of the League for Programming > Freedom (LPF), which opposes software patents, and have been involved > with the LPF since 1989. I am a member of the Boston Social Law Library > and I also have access to lawyers and extensive legal materials. > > I've heard variations of Paul Hoffman's accusations above from people > who want to to advocate their own position by encouraging people to > ignore indisputable facts or by advocating disregard the law in some > cases. I first heard that claim when I told a network admin that the > newsgroup alt.sex.pedophilia shouldn't be carried because it is used for > distributing child pornography. The admin wrote back asserting that he > would report me to the bar association for practicing law without a > license. I did contact a lawyer; stating facts, opinion, and my > position are not legal advice and are not the practice of law without a > license. Paul's claims here are false. Please ignore them. > > > > The working group did not get any clear > > >answers on what particular patents this draft may infringe, but a patent > > >holder (Certicom) did assert an IPR disclosure (1004) listing many > > >patents. > > > > That statement did not say "we have a patent that encumbers the > > specific documents in question". > > Yes, it does indeed state that. That's what an IPR statement discloses, > and IPR 1004 lists this document, and cites the patents. > > > > We have no alternative but to accept the Certicom disclosure > > > statements as meaning that the TLS Extractor draft is > > > patent-encumbered without a universal, free defensive license. > > > > Who is "we"? Dean Anderson is not a leader in the IETF, nor of the TLS > > protocol or developer community. "We" have plenty of alternatives, for > > almost any value of "we" that make sense here. > > Paul Hoffman is also not the leader of the IETF, and of course, "we" as > used by both Paul and myself does not mean that either of us speak for > the IETF. I used "we" just as Paul used it. Paul's objection to "we" > has no relevance. Please ignore it. > > However, contrary to Paul's assertion that '"we" have many > alternatives', there are in fact only two alternatives available to the > IETF at present: Either approve the document with its licencing terms > as-is, or reject the document. I argue, on a firm factual basis, for > rejecting that document. > > --Dean > > -- > Av8 Internet Prepared to pay a premium for better service? > www.av8.net faster, more reliable, better service > 617 344 9000 > > _______________________________________________ > TLS mailing list > TLS@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 284k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "YES WE CAN!" Barack ( Berry ) Obama "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx My Phone: 214-244-4827 _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf