Re: [idn] Re:

["James Seng/Personal" <jseng@pobox.org.sg>]

On the leakage of the MIME format of Bill's mail, it is a problem of my
side. Sorry. For some reasons when I bounce mails with MIME contain thru
majordomo, it tends to screwed up, especially when there is a long list
of headers.

Anyway, I already put Bill onto the auto-approve list since he is not on
the idn list directly.

-James Seng

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Crocker" <dhc@dcrocker.net>
To: "Heinze, Bill" <bill.heinze@tkhr.com>
Cc: <idn@ops.ietf.org>; <george.thomas@tkhr.com>; <jim.kayden@tkhr.com>;
<scott.horstemeyer@tkhr.com>; <steve.risley@tkhr.com>;
<jeff.kuester@tkhr.com>; <dan.mcclure@tkhr.com>; <dan.santos@tkhr.com>;
<dan.gresham@tkhr.com>; <scott.culpepper@tkhr.com>;
<mike.tempel@tkhr.com>; <david.risley@tkhr.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 4:31 PM
Subject: [idn] Re:


> Dear Bill,
>
> On the off chance that the email to the IETF's IDN list, with your
address
> in the From field, was not an attempt by you or someone else to
proffer
> some form of humor, a few comments are in order:
>
> When making making claims of technical innovation, especially to a
> technical body, it helps to use the communications technology
> properly.  Your note was nearly incoherent because of serious encoding
> problems with your posting.  Further the web citations your provided
were
> quite unusable.  As well, <http://l2.espacenet.com/> appears to be
> inaccessible.
>
> Nonetheless:
>
>
> At 10:43 PM 1/16/2002 -0800, Heinze, Bill wrote:
> >notify you of the publication of World Intellectual Property =
> >Organization International Publication No.
>
> A WIPO publication?  How nice.
>
> When did WIPO start issuing patents?
>
>
> >This patent application generally relates to a system, method, and
>
> Application?  As in, no force of law yet?  How interesting.
>
>
> >We believe that many of the technologies being discussed in this =
> >mailing
> >list infringe one or more of the 213 claims starting at page 87 of
the
>
> 1.  It is a bit unusual to refer to a "technology" as infringing.
Perhaps
> you meant that you believe that some product USING the technology
would be
> infringing?  A pity your meaning is unclear.
>
> 2.  Patent applications usually begin with an impressively inflated
number
> of claims.  For those patents that actually issue, the number of
claims
> that survive is typically vastly smaller.  That makes it difficult
even to
> guess which portions of your impressive list of claims one should
worry about.
>
>
> >Please note that failure to promptly obtain the appropriate =
> >authorization may subject you and your organization to liability for
> >royalties in the
>
> You are threatening legal actions against folks in this standards
> organizations for doing standards work without paying you a license
fee?
>
> Either you are jesting or, alas, once again at least being
impressively
> unclear.
>
>
> >William F. Heinze, Esq.
>
> Esquire?  Cute touch, though doesn't it create a challenge for what to
use
> upon making partner?
>
>
> At any rate, please do feel free to distract our discussion list
further,
> but perhaps with postings that are more readable in format and clear
in
> content.
>
> And in that unfortunate off chance that you were not the originator of
the
> note sent under your name, to the person who did:  tsk. tsk.  Why
would you
> want to alienate this standards organization to Mr. Heinze, by posting
such
> a bothersome note, so badly formulated?
>
> d/
>
> ----------
> Dave Crocker  <mailto:dcrocker@brandenburg.com>
> Brandenburg InternetWorking  <http://www.brandenburg.com>
> tel +1.408.246.8253;  fax +1.408.273.6464
>
>