Re: Where is the RFC editor?

[Masataka Ohta <mohta at necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>]

Peter;

> > That the RFC Editor is funded by USG is one of real problems.
> >
> > Looking at the reality, USG is likely to say "As we pay for RFC
> > we
> > have the right to control the content of RFCs".
> 
> Also, would not the content of RFC's be the intellectual property
> of the internet community at large ??

W.r.t. copyright, it really matters who pays for what.

Under US (and JP) copyright laws, if the edition of RFCs are perfomed
as a work for hire, the editorial copyright of the work belongs to
those who pays for the work, unless otherwise arranged.

> Many inputs from various individuals /forums etc.

USG still do not have any right on the content of individual RFCs.

But, RFC as a series, it is still likely that USG says "As we pay for
RFC we have the right to control the content of RFCs".

Well, you may think it stupid, but it is equally stupid for USG to
say "As we pay for TLD, we have the right to control the content
of TLDs".

> so would the right to control the content be solely at the
> RFC editor choice and if so under what
> universal law or treaty has this been endorsed ??

See above. Or consult any book on US copyright laws and you will
find what "work for hire" means.

> So in the event funding is
> suspended, my question would be,
> under which universal mandate would the responsibility of RFC
> editor fall under ???

ISOC, of course.

							Masataka Ohta