Re: ARMCHAIR LAWYER ALERT (was: Re: Atom's dates may have legal implications... At least one "objective date" should be supported.)

[Mark Pilgrim <pilgrim@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 19:20:59 -0400, Bob Wyman <bobwyman@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> Paul Hoffman wrote:
> > (unless I'm wrong about you being a lawyer offering legal advice)
>         The "time-honored habit of the IETF" of attacking anyone other than
> a lawyer who attempts to contribute by commenting on the law is one of the
> most infantile and unproductive traditions of this process. The idea that
> only those who belong to a particular group are able to speculate about and
> comment on the law is reminiscent of the aristocratic cultures that are
> anathema to everything that I, as an American, have been taught to value. In

You're either a lawyer or you're not.  They have a test and
everything.  If you've passed it, you are welcome to speculate on
Atom's legal aspects on this list.  If you haven't passed it, you are
welcome to speculate on Atom's legal aspects anywhere except this
list.

>         As far as my credentials are concerned: I have been in the
> technology business for thirty years and have, for one reason or another,
> needed to study patent office practice and patent law on numerous occasions.
> I hold four patents.

I work with people who have ten times this number.  They still go to
lawyers for legal advice.

-- 
Cheers,
-Mark