please review 'application/pdf' -- new version

[Keith Moore]

that strikes me as a reasonable way to handle the issue of what kinds of
control Adobe believes it can assert over use of PDF.  

OTOH, If the resulting draft still had statements to the effect that
implementations "must" implement the permissions stuff, I'd consider
that a separate issue.

Keith

> > The disclaimer notwithstanding, it still creates the 
> > appearance of IETF support. 
> 
> In rereviewing IETF practices in this area, I think the right
> thing to do is to remove the IPR claims from the internet
> draft. A separate IPR notice can be sent to statements at ietf.org.
> The internet draft (and the subsequent RFC) would then contain
> the standard notice that there are IPR claims related to
> the technology in the draft.
> 
> I think this will address the issue of having an RFC
> seem to endorse the legitimacy IPR claims, despite the 
> appearance of a disclaimer.
> 
> Larry
> 
>