Re: [TLS] Document Action: 'TLS Elliptic Curve Cipher Suites with

["Dan Harkins" <dharkins@xxxxxxxxxx>]

  Hi Simon,

  "no" is the correct answer for J-PAKE because the the creators of
the protocol said, "Since this protocol is the result of an academic
research project, we didn’t — and have no intention to — patent it."
But that says nothing about anyone else's claims.

  So if, hypothetically, one of the creators of J-PAKE wrote an I-D
specifying its use in TLS then he would not have to file anything on
that contribution since he knows he did not patent it. But "Patent
Trolls R Us (tm)" could believe it held a patent on this technique and
I am not aware of anything the IETF could do to compel them to disclose
their patent since no employee of "Patent Trolls R Us (tm)" took part
in the authorship of the I-D.

  So, I think "no" is the correct answer.

  Dan.

On Tue, July 1, 2008 3:15 pm, Simon Josefsson wrote:
> Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@xxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> At 4:37 PM -0400 7/1/08, Richard M Stallman wrote:
>>>All that is true, but doesn't the IETF have ways to press the big
>>>companies to say whether they have any patents over a proposed
>>>standard?
>>
>> No.
>
> That is a rather terse answer.
>
> The IETF has RFC 3979, in particular section 6.1, which says that IETF
> participants must file a disclosure when he knows about his own patents
> in IETF contributions, and is encouraged to file a disclosure for
> patents owned by others.  That count as a "yes" answer to this question
> for me.
>
> To clarify, the IETF has RFC 3979 as the instrument to pressure big
> companies to file these notifications, through the individuals who
> participate in the IETF.
>
> Could you elaborate on why you believe "no" is the correct answer?
>
> /Simon
> _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list
> TLS@xxxxxxxx
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
>


_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
TLS@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls