Hi,
Network Ops folks use the IETF standards for their operations. I see
lot of nifty things coming out from the IETF stable and i was
wondering why those dont get patented? Why bother releasing some
really good idea to IETF (i.e. open standards bodies) when the vendor
could have patented it. The network operators can still use it as long
as they are using that vendor's equipment. I understand that interop
can be an issue, since it will be a patented technology, but it will
always work between the boxes from the same vendor. If so, then whats
the issue?
Is interop the only issue because of which most ideas get released
into IETF? I guess interop is *an* issue since nobody wants a single
vendor network.
Thanks,
Abhishek
I would point you at the 14+ frame-relay networks (that can't
interconnect in a meaningful manner) that MCI (still, mostly) runs
today... go-go-vendor-proprietary solutions!!
-chris
As an starting point you should read "The Tao of the IETF" RFC4677 (currently,
update draft in progress).
About your particular question read section 8.4.5.
Regards
Jorge
As an starting point you should read "The Tao of the IETF" RFC4677 (currently,
update draft in progress).
About your particular question read section 8.4.5.
Regards
Jorge
Right. And it's subtler than you think. Some network operators have
patents (not just vendors). Some are held by organizations that only
exist to hold patents and don't actually know much about networking.
And just because something is patented doesn't mean it isn't
interoperable -- most networking standards are patented.
swb
Just like as
- "US Patent 6701329 - Aging and scavenging of DNS resource records"
(Microsoft)
- "US Patent 7337910 - Methods and devices for responding to request
for unregistered domain name to indicate a predefined type of service"
(Verisign SiteFinder fiasco)
- "US Patent 6560634 - Method of determining unavailability of an
internet domain name" (Verisign)
- "US Patent 7580982 - Email filtering system and method" (Go Daddy)
- "US Patent 7130878 - Systems and methods for domain name
registration by proxy" (Go Daddy)
Just to list a few.
Be careful the next time you use "vi", somebody may have already
patented that regular expression.
Cheers
Jorge
The real question is why Patent something?
The reality is even if you patent any idea/feature, other vendors will come out with a similar (although not patent infringing) version of the same idea/feature. While you might get a short term jump on other vendors, if the idea is really good, everyone else will catch up quickly. Further, customers REALLY like inter-op, I know for one I don't use protocols from vendors that aren't "standard"
Patents are a good source of revenue for companies that invest a lot
on R&D and to create "intellectual property"
(well sometimes not that much).
As far as I know in the US you can patent any "original idea" (even
the best approach to catch brain farts with a spoon) regardless of its
application, usability, stupidity or interoperability.
Some companies need to keep their attorneys entertained, but if by a
chance you happen to "use" somebody else "original idea" in your
product, the inventor of the "original idea" has the right to block
you (many file patents just for that) to use the idea or request the
payment of royalties until the protection expires (17 or 20 years
after filing depending if it was after or before 1995, some design
patents expire in 14 years) and you in theory are able to use the idea
but probably it will be to old.
Jorge
The purpose of a patent is not to keep others from using your idea but
exactly the opposite. It gives you exclusive use of an idea but also
makes for a mechanism where your idea is then documented and can be used
and improved upon by others once your exclusive use expires.
It was designed (in the US, at least) as an alternative to keeping
everything secret and an idea dying with the inventor/enterprise. The
notion being that you would have exclusive use of the idea long enough
to have a commercial advantage but eventually the world could benefit in
a more general sense if the idea proved to be a good one. The way
patents are used today as a commodity is against what the original
purpose was.
To quote http://www.uh.edu/engines/epi792.htm :
As secretary of state, Jefferson ran our first American patent office.
For him, its purpose was to promulgate inventions, not to protect them.
He hated monopoly and was determined that the patent process shouldn't
serve it. The peculiar character of an idea, said Jefferson, is that
... no one possesses the less because everyone possesses the whole
of it. He who receives an idea from me receives [it] without lessening
[me], as he who lights his [candle] at mine receives light without
darkening me.
Jefferson had used mathematics to design a wonderfully improved plow.
When he was done, he gave it away -- to America -- then to Europe. He
would turn in his grave at the way today's patents make ideas into
property.
The purpose of a patent is not to keep others from using your idea but
exactly the opposite. It gives you exclusive use of an idea but also
makes for a mechanism where your idea is then documented and can be used
and improved upon by others once your exclusive use expires.
Explain that to the pharma' boys
http://www.earthinstitute.columbia.edu/cgsd/documents/lehman.pdf
Yes and no -- don't confuse the purpose of a patent with the rights it gives you. A patent is not the right to do something; it's the right to keep others from doing it.
The purpose, though, is as you say: in exchange for publication of your ideas, society gives you a limited-term monopoly.
I should add: patents can help society not just because it sees your ideas, but because of the monopoly: people are motivated to invent around your patent.
--Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
may be better to ask this question on the ietf list. they deserve it.
randy