fyi,

On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 5:54 AM, Vint Cerf <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> i am trying to find out a bit more about verisign's plans and motivations.
>
> Bob and I did not patent as you know precisely to be sure that it was open
> to all. At this point it is too late to patent because we made everything
> public and that's a good thing.
>
> v
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Alex Gakuru <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> What if VeriSign had invested the Internet? Perhaps Vint and Bob should
>> reconsider patenting the Internet and charge all these corporations then
>> donate the proceeds to the Internet poor? :-j
>> ---
>> "Then the question was would it be something that could be rolled out tothe rest of the world? We didn't know for sure but when we worked on it, we
>> decided not to patent, not to copyright, not to control, but to share
>> everything we knew about the Internet design to the general public all
>> around the world." <
>> http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9138216/Cerf_Turning_off_pieces_of_the_Net_not_sensible_
>> >
>>
>> Alex
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 6:15 PM, Kerry Brown <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>>  I don’t know enough about patent law to know how broad the
>>> implications of this patent are. If successful would this mean anyone
>>> transferring a DNSSEC enabled domain has to pay a fee to VeriSign?
>>>
>>> *http://domainnamewire.com/wp-content/verisign-dnssec.pdf*<http://domainnamewire.com/wp-content/verisign-dnssec.pdf>
>>>
>>> Kerry Brown
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>