Re: question about IETF policy on RF patent policies

["todd glassey" <todd.glassey@worldnet.att.net>]

Lars - this is a reply from an Attorney. In fact OpenSource's Attorney...
So let me ask you and this WG this, who designed this IP policy, attorney's
or technologists? - I think the answer is pretty obvious though. Because
what I have found too often as a manager of technologists, is that we come
up with ideas and ask the legal department the following question "Does my
idea address these issues" rather than the really key question which is
"What is the best way of meeting these needs".

What the IETF in many instances has failed to take note of in my opinion, is
that in the former case what is happening is that the Attorney is forced to
validate that the client is competent to practice law, and in the latter
case, the attorney is specifying the framework from their legal experience.

So which is it? Has anyone asked Jorge what he would do as part of a Release
and Declaration process for IP? or is this more of the old "we will just ram
it down their throats and if the Attorney's don't bless it we will just fire
them" kind of attitude that seems so prevalent here?

Todd

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Lawrence E. Rosen" <lrosen@rosenlaw.com>
To: "'Lars-Erik Jonsson (EAB)'" <Lars-Erik.Jonsson@epl.ericsson.se>; "'todd
glassey'" <todd.glassey@worldnet.att.net>; <ipr-wg@ietf.org>
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 8:24 AM
Subject: RE: question about IETF policy on RF patent policies


> > Actually, I think "prefer" is exactly the right word to use
> > here, as it is up to the WG's to decide which parameters
> > are important to consider in each case.
>
> What foolishness!  A policy that isn't really a policy!
>
> /Larry Rosen
>
>

_______________________________________________
Ipr-wg mailing list
Ipr-wg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg