[idn] Assessing patent "validity"

[Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>]

It is tempting for the working group to travel down a path, considering 
whether the Walid patent is valid.

Let me very, very strongly encourage people to avoid the temptation:

         An IETF working group lacks competence for such a 
discussion.  Nothing we can do will change that.

         Finding some patent attorneys who will say that the patent is weak 
does not alter the competence of the group.  Fighting a patent is ALWAYS a 
lengthy, messy, expensive affair and the outcome is NEVER guaranteed.  I 
said ALWAYS lengthy and the outcome is NEVER guaranteed.

         A standards group cannot afford to pass a standard that uses 
technology with questionable legal standing.  It confuses the market and a 
confused market will not invest in the standard.  Hence it does not get 
deployed or used.

         We have an urgent requirement for an iDNS standard that can be 
used immediately.  Choosing a specification that is known to be encumbered 
by intellectual property claims -- when the holder of those claims has not 
provided a documented commitment to handle the claims in a way that is 
acceptable to the IETF -- means that the specification will not succeed.

         Walid has had months to participate constructively, to find a way 
to handle the claims acceptably for the IETF.  Serious negotiations can 
take months, but in this case, serious discussions have not even 
begun!  This establishes an unfortunate but clear situation:  The working 
group must assume that there will not be an agreement between Walid and the 
IETF that is acceptable to the IETF.

         So we need to engineer a solution that works around their patent.

d/



----------
Dave Crocker   <mailto:dcrocker@brandenburg.com>
Brandenburg InternetWorking   <http://www.brandenburg.com>
tel: +1.408.246.8253;   fax: +1.408.273.6464