[73099] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: BGP-based blackholing/hijacking patented in Australia?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Henry Linneweh)
Thu Aug 12 14:51:44 2004
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 11:47:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: Henry Linneweh <hrlinneweh@sbcglobal.net>
To: "Stephen J. Wilcox" <steve@telecomplete.co.uk>
Cc: Petri Helenius <pete@he.iki.fi>,
Niels Bakker <niels=nanog@bakker.net>, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0408121923060.31264-100000@server2.tcw.telecomplete.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
ok so then in the copyright let us see if can cover
all variations of the original concept as belonging to
the original author or author's as a test case for
adaption and modificaiton to copyright law. I strongly
believe in the protection of original idea's in
reference to rfc's
-Henry
--- "Stephen J. Wilcox" <steve@telecomplete.co.uk>
wrote:
> one issue with that might be that the patents are
> taken out on variations of the
> core idea, imho the variations are not new ideas but
> legally they seem to get
> away with it
>
> Steve
>
> On Thu, 12 Aug 2004, Henry Linneweh wrote:
>
> > Well if it will harm the community, would it be
> possible to auto copyright
> > rfc's, so that the authors of a concept can
> prevent someone from sipping their
> > effort off?
> >
> > Ignorance at the top doesn't mean we can't be like
> always leading the
> > way......
> >
> > -Henry
> >
> >
> >
> > --- "Stephen J. Wilcox" <steve@telecomplete.co.uk>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > On Thu, 12 Aug 2004, Petri Helenius wrote:
> > >
> > > > We have had running code for this since early
> this
> > > year, so depending on the
> > > > date they filed, prior art exists well
> documented.
> > > (blueprints obviously
> > > > predate running code)
> > >
> > > everyone has gone patent crazy, every time a new
> > > concept is developed some
> > > company applies for patent. is this the future
> or
> > > rfcs then?
> > >
> > > Steve
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
