That sounds pretty good. -Grant
On Feb 24, 2010, at 7:23 PM, Karl Wright wrote: > > FWIW, there may be some hope here. See attached... > > Karl > > > From: Karl Wright <kwri...@metacarta.com> > Date: February 24, 2010 7:22:15 PM EST > To: legal-disc...@apache.org > Subject: Re: Apache NTLM implementations > > > William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: >> On 2/24/2010 4:24 PM, Karl Wright wrote: >>> As part of the initial phase of development, I submitted this >>> implementation to the HttpClient project, and received advice that it >>> could not be accepted because of Apache policy pertaining to potential >>> issues of IP infringement. >> AIUI - this is probably covered under the interop/Microsoft patent pledge. >> If it is not, asking them to make it explicitly so might not be a big issue. > > That document seems to protect authors of open-source code, but not corporate > users of said code, unless I read it incorrectly. > That was the specific concern that was raised by the HttpClient team. > However, the good news is that it appears there is no patent around NTLM, > which is the protocol in question. It's explicitly mentioned in this > document, page 9, item 14: > > http://download.microsoft.com/download/1/0/4/1041AEF2-0ABC-4D48-A909-EC3CD52A7F13/WSPP_Patent_Mapping.pdf > > What do you think? > Thanks, > Karl > > >> See >> http://www.microsoft.com/openspecifications/programs/wspp/wspp-patents/wspp-patent-pledges/ >> and >> related documents. >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscr...@apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-h...@apache.org > > > >
