Re: review of DK and IIM patent licenses

Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This contaminates other software, by terminating for any patent action > > against Cisco about anything. It even seems to contaminate hardware! > Note that it only terminates the patent license, which just takes us >

Re: review of DK and IIM patent licenses

MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have not read the patents, so I have no idea what these apply to and I > suspect it's better that I shouldn't know. > > Daniel Quinlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Here is the IIM license: >> http://www.ietf.org/ietf/IPR/cisco-ipr-draft-fenton-identified-ma

Re: review of DK and IIM patent licenses

I have not read the patents, so I have no idea what these apply to and I suspect it's better that I shouldn't know. Daniel Quinlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Here is the IIM license: > http://www.ietf.org/ietf/IPR/cisco-ipr-draft-fenton-identified-mail-00.txt This contaminates other software,

review of DK and IIM patent licenses

Hi folks. I'm seeking additional review of the Domain Keys and Internet Identified Mail patent licenses which are cryptographic email authentication technologies from Yahoo! and Cisco, respectively. I believe these licenses are much closer to allowing open source implementations, unlike the PRA p