On Oct 27, 2008, at 23:21, TS Glassey wrote:
Which further document's why its improper for you Paul to be giving
people legal advice here. The US Government issued the patent so
they and six other jurisdictions thought it was OK and there wasn't
prior art preventing its implementation.
Pe
On Mon, 27 Oct 2008, TS Glassey wrote:
I agree. The patent is irrelevant.
Then you personally are assuming all professional liability for this working
group if you are wrong since you just formally advised everyone on this list
to ignore the patent's coverage.
It is interesting that you cl
Ok, that's enough.
Todd, you have made your point that you believe you have IPR in this
space. Noted.
Now everyone please stop this, immediately. This is not a forum for
legal debates, let alone insults, and claims that Todd might or
might not have against various implementors are
On Mon, 27 Oct 2008, Paul Wouters wrote:
Just to inform the IETF community,
Xelerance received a call from a person who refused to identify himself,
who threatened with law suits and would only say it was a matter of
"patent infringement". This person refused to reveal his name, his client
or t
No Paul that is an out and out LIE - I made that call and what I asked for
was the legal department and whoever answered the phone refused to provide
information as to who that was unless I justified the conversation. I was
told I would have to 'specify which XCelera Products and processes' befo
- Original Message -
From: "Paul Wouters" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "bert hubert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: ; "TS Glassey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 12:48 PM
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] draft-dickinson-dnsop-nameserver-control-00
On Mon, 27 Oct 2008, bert hubert wrote:
You know Bert, the IETF requires I formally disclose this same info each
time a new infringing work is published, so take it up with them if you have
an issue.
Todd Glassey
- Original Message -
From: "bert hubert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "TS Glassey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: ; <[EMAIL
No that is because of microsoft's new security fixes. But since there is no
time-stamping process used to insure the integrity of the IETF's posting it
seems that you folks dont want anyone who is constrained by the IETF's MUST
DISCLOSE PATENT CONTROLS to do that.
If you did then you would alr
On Thu, 27 Nov 2008, TS Glassey wrote:
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
Is that why you are writing emails a month into the future?
Paul
_
On Mon, 27 Oct 2008, bert hubert wrote:
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
On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 12:26:39PM -0800, TS Glassey wrote:
> >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
>
- Original Message -
From: "bert hubert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "TS Glassey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:
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
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 litigatin
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.
This was posted originally with IPR201 but evidently no one bothers to check
and see w
Hi,
Stephen Morris, Roy Arends and I have just submitted
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dickinson-dnsop-nameserver-control-00
This draft describes a design for a name server control protocol that
addresses the requirements set out in draft-ietf-dnsop-name-server-
management-reqs-01.txt.
15 matches
Mail list logo
