> > "Note: If I am explicitly told that this was considered and participants were > ok with the declaration even as-is, then I'll clear." > > This never happened. Point 2: >
seems to me the participants weren't (and aren't), then. > > In my last note I explained why the decision was made to not update the > disclosure: we do not know if the patent will be granted, and we do not know > which, if any, of the claims will be allowed. We cannot provide a definitive > licensing declaration for something that remains unknown. > So Verisign cannot make a statement because the patent application status is unclear, but the WG is expected to make a statement despite the IPR claims/licensing terms being unclear? A statement like 'if claims X and Y are allowed, we shall require licensing' or 'we shall go full FRAND' doesn't seem that much to ask for. Less so than the WG saying 'terms provided later are ok'. Jelte _______________________________________________ regext mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
