Thierry Moreau wrote:
> Check by yourself, I do not provide
> professional advice in here.

And that's why I made my suggestion that we do these analyses in a
professional manner! Too many patent-savvy attorneys (and their companies?)
expect the community to decide these things in a random fashion. The
IETF--collectively--needs professional advice, including from you. 

I will allow that you speak for yourself and offer no guarantees or
warranties. But expert attorneys need to give us their expert opinions about
the effects of specific patents on our specific work.

That's why I'm so irritated that the previous IPR WG, since disbanded
(fortunately), refused even to discuss a patent policy for IETF. Of course
such studied ignorance can lead to community displays of confusion and
anger. Hence the FSF campaign and others like it; entirely justified.

/Larry 

Lawrence Rosen
Rosenlaw & Einschlag, a technology law firm (www.rosenlaw.com)
3001 King Ranch Road, Ukiah, CA 95482
707-485-1242 * cell: 707-478-8932 * fax: 707-485-1243
Skype: LawrenceRosen


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thierry Moreau [mailto:thierry.mor...@connotech.com]
> Sent: Friday, February 13, 2009 10:20 AM
> To: lro...@rosenlaw.com
> Cc: ietf@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: References to Redphone's "patent"
> 
> 
> 
> Lawrence Rosen wrote:
> 
> > Lots of the recent emails on this list refer to Redphone's "patent" but
> > there is no such thing.
> >
> 
> In my emails, I used the reference to US patent application 11/234,404
> as amended on 2008/01/25.
> 
> > As anyone who has ever worked with real patents knows, there is a great
> > difference between a patent application and a patent. Whatever claims
> are
> > written in patent applications are merely wishes and hopes, placeholders
> for
> > negotiated language after a detailed examination of the application.
> Until
> > the PTO actually issues a patent, nothing is fixed. And even then,
> > newly-found prior art and other issues can defeat an issued patent.
> >
> 
> Indeed, plus the geographical applicability restrictions that are
> determined 30 or 31 months after the priority date according to PCT
> rules - the above patent application has national or regional
> applications in Australia, Canadian, and the EU (I didn't check the EPO
> database, perhaps it's not the whole EPC member states).
> 
> > Why are we all so afraid of Redphone? Who gives a damn what patent
> claims
> > they hope to get?
> >
> 
> I guess (i.e. speculate) that it is more convenient for the FSF to get
> publicity / support with a case involving a small organization without
> significant market presence and lobbying resources that could retaliate
> an FSF campaign more visibly. I thought the GnuTLS connection triggered
> the FSF action, but Simon corrected me on this hypothesis.
> 
> > There's something wrong with the IETF process if spurious and self-
> serving
> > assertions that "a patent application has been filed" can serve to hold
> up
> > progress on important technology. I wish you'd ask real patent attorneys
> to
> > advise the community on this rather than react with speculation and a
> > generalized fear of patents.
> >
> 
> I agree.
> 
> You may notice that the FSF did not share (AFAIK) any result of
> investigation into the patent application status which would include
> some professional advice.
> 
> Actually, two PCT/WIPO search/examination reports are on-line, and one
> *denies* novelty to every claims but 3 of them, and denies inventive
> step to all of them! The patent applicant may (further) amend the claims
> at the national or regional phase, but the initial assessment is not so
> good for the patent applicant. Check by yourself, I do not provide
> professional advice in here.
> 
> So it's really the FSF campaign that is detracting the IETF process here
> in the way you are alluding above. The Redphone's IPR disclosure 1026
> verbatim does not detract the IETF process.
> 
> Again, finer investigations and analyses of IPR issues (finer than
> ideological opposition to patents) would be benefitial to the IETF.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> 
> - Thierry Moreau

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Reply via email to