Re: Fwd: Certicom IP Rights

[Darren Reed <avalon@caligula.anu.edu.au>]

In some mail from Scott Fluhrer, sie said:
[...]
> It is possible that WO 00/01109 or some of the uncited patents or non-US
> patent applications may be applicable.  However, in every case I did
> examine, I could not see how any of the IETF documents in question, or
> an implementation based on such documents, would necessarily be in
> violation.  I would encourage other people to scan through these
> patents, and see if my assessments are accurate.  And again, for the
> third time, I am not a lawyer, and please do not use my opinions as
> legal advise.

You were very careful in everything you said to say that the IETF
documents do not _mandate_ any of the said approaches in the patents
so I'll ask what I think is an obvious question:

In implementing one of the said IETF documents, is it possible or
likely that someone might chose (perhaps poorly) to do so using one
of the patented methods ?  And if so, are there alternatives that
would bring compliance and avoid patent grief ?

Darren