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

From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 10:59:08 -0700

> 	It will not take a valid legal argument to derail
> the widespread deployment of any standard that comes from
> this working group. All that is needed is the, perhaps
> unfounded, fear that implementing SenderID or any other
> standard with nebulous IPR issues is going to bite the user
> in a tender area. 

An unfounded claim can certainly block progress. But an 
unsubstantiated claim cannot.

It is not sufficient to say 'we don't like it'

---

From: Yakov Shafranovich <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 14:35:12 -0400

> It is not sufficient to say 'we don't like it'

This is no longer simple unsubstantiated. Two prominent open source 
*lawyers* have expressed their expert opinion that this license is not 
compatible with open source software:

http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/mail-archive/msg03678.html

The facts are on the table: this license is potentially not usable with 
open source software. This is something that will affect deployment 
since anyone using open source will be hesistating before 
implementation. Whether their interpretation is correct is irrelevant - 
the fact that multiple lawyers are not arguing about it, only makes the 
legal issue more confusing, thus delaying deployment.

Yakov

---

From: Ryan Ordway <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 11:32:28 -0700

> It is not sufficient to say 'we don't like it'

	Surely you are correct, when referring to the
design of the standard. I am referring to the post-design
deployment. 

-- 
HELO, my name is root... you have SIGKILLed my father... prepare to vi!

---

From: Yakov Shafranovich <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 14:38:12 -0400

Yakov Shafranovich wrote:

> since anyone using open source will be hesitating before 
> the fact that multiple lawyers are arguing about it, only makes the