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 >>> >>> >> >> >