----- Original Message -----
From: "bert hubert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "TS Glassey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <dnsop@ietf.org>
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 11:11 AM
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] draft-dickinson-dnsop-nameserver-control-00
On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 11:01:13AM -0800, TS Glassey wrote:
Yeah and like the other DNSSEC I-D's I dfound numerous things in it that
would violate the controls put in place by US Patent 6,370,629 of which I
am one of the two owners and controlling parties to that IP.
Please start litigating. I've looked at this patent and the other one you
mentioned in the context of DNSSEC, and based on earlier discussions with
a
patent attorney, your claims don't look like they would stand up at least
in
Dutch courts.
Burt - as to litigating, lets get the general counsel of NETLABS into this
convo RIGHT NOW because that is exactly my intent sir.
draft-dickinson-dnsop-nameserver-control does not even mention a
geographical location, nor does it mention anything that is time
controlled.
If I recall correctly, making bogus IPR claims is a punishable offense at
least in Germany - SCO suffered that fate.
So either litigate or refrain from intimidating us.
Be advised that the IETF process REQUIRES ME TO NOTICE THE IETF EACH TIME
SOMETHING IS PUBLISHED WHICH INFRINGES ON THE PATENT, per the direct words
of BCP78 and its supporting documents. So if you object take it up with the
IPR WG and the IESG for making it mandatory for me to notify the IETF each
time one of you does something to infringe on our patent rights.
Bert
--
http://www.PowerDNS.com Open source, database driven DNS Software
http://netherlabs.nl Open and Closed source services
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Internal Virus Database is out of date.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.8.4/1749 - Release Date: 10/27/2008
7:57 AM
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
