On 11-Jul-2006, at 13:44, Jari Arkko wrote:
In any case, to move forward I can ask our IPR department to make a human readable explanation of what the license means in practise. This hopefully helps the people in the WG to make an informed decision. Do you think that would be useful?
I am still confused as to why non-lawyers are being asked to indicate comfort with the IPR issues as a prerequisite to the specifications proceeding, when it's so unclear as (a) whether any indicated comfort really means anything, and (b) how anybody should go about gauging their own comfort when they are not qualified to understand the question.
This seems like something the working group should expect the IETF as an organisation to find properly-qualified opinions on. I don't understand why the organisation is instead seeking opinions from self- professed non-lawyers in the working group.
Joe