Subject: Can there be an early decision on the SenderID license?

From: wayne <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 20:56:29 -0500

Right now, we are supposed to be reviewing all of the documents.
However, as demonstrated in the "DEPLOY/IPR: Fundamental
Disagreements, or Get On With It" thread, there doesn't seem to be a
rough consensus that the SenderID license is acceptable.  (Actually,
there appears to be a rough consensus that it isn't acceptable.)

Unlike other corrections/suggestions that we are making, the SenderID
license can not be changed.  Therefore, if it is unacceptable, this
will prevent the marid-core and marid-pra I-Ds from advancing.

If these two I-Ds can't advance, it would be a waste of time to review
them for other problems.  Actually, it would also be a waste of time
for the marid-submitter I-D to advance because it requires the PRA.

Now, I don't expect the co-chairs to rule today or tomorrow.  There
needs to be more time for people to make up their minds and express
their views on the SenderID license.  Heck, while I have raised
certain objections to it, I still am not reading to say whether it is
acceptable to me or not.  (I'm hoping to hear from people like the FSF
and IBM lawyers who were working with MS earlier.)

However, it seems to me to be a wise use of this working groups time
to decide the license issue early, and then move on from there.

Thoughts?

-wayne

---

From: Waitman C Gobble II <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 20:58:51 -0700

>to decide the license issue early, and then move on from there.

Hello

I didn't have strong feelings about the license either way until I read 
the comment someone made about the issues regarding shipping Sender-ID 
stuff with operating systems such as various linux and bsd distros. It 
would seem likely that anything that provides an SMTP related service 
could be kept out of the distro. Of course, I understand that the end 
user could enter into a license agreement and get the software, or 
perhaps it could be distributed with the requirement that you had to 
license it before using it. Just sounds like bad karma to me. Do you 
want to download qmail or something but have to go get a license from MS 
to run it?

But thinking about it from a different point of view -

It sounds like to use _any_ SMTP server you would essentially have to 
get a license from MS. (Presuming that Sender ID is mainstream)

Waitman Gobble