Well actually, most of the IETF RFCs, were they to be in the commercial domain, would be assimilated to patents. Even the computer programs (that could be protected by copyright subject to the interfaces exception) would, in the US, be protectable by patents. Correct? CW On 03 Jun 2016, at 18:38, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 05:36:58PM +0200, Christopher Wilkinson wrote:
I pointed out some time ago that the IETF Trust's stock-in-trade was not copyrights, trademarks and domain names
What do you think its stock in trade is? Holding copyrights, trademarks, and domain names is what it does.
Meanwhile, all of Sidley's legal flummery that Andrew Sullivan takes exception to, could be covered by an exchange of letters or an MoU. At least pro tem.
I don't take exception to any of what they said. I was simply trying to explain what I understood to be the state of affairs, and I thought it was important to get that out for people to consider, since we don't have a heck of a lot of time.
Best regards,
A
-- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com _______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship