It is actually very important because those of us who spend their time looking up patent prior art can't necessarily check the GitHub in 20 years time.
In some of the cases I have been involved in, the plaintiff has quite literally read posts on an IETF mailing list and turned them into a patent application. On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Hugo Landau <[email protected]> wrote: > Here we go: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-landau-acme-caa/ > > Hugo Landau > > On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 11:50:21AM -0700, Ted Hardie wrote: >> Any reason not to publish this in the usual way? That will twig some folks >> who look at the stream of published drafts. >> >> Ted >> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 11:46 AM, Salz, Rich <[1][email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Alright, here's the first draft. >> > >> > [2]https://hlandau.github.io/draft-landau-acme-caa/ >> >> Can others in the WG read this and make a suggestion as to yes/no >> adopt? It's short (and the first para of 3.1 is a "did you read this" >> sentence fragment test? :) >> >> Thanks! >> _______________________________________________ >> Acme mailing list >> [3][email protected] >> [4]https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme >> >> References >> >> Visible links >> 1. mailto:[email protected] >> 2. https://hlandau.github.io/draft-landau-acme-caa/ >> 3. mailto:[email protected] >> 4. https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme > > _______________________________________________ > Acme mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme _______________________________________________ Acme mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
