Re: IPR Questions Raised by Sam Hartman at the IETF 73 Plenary

[Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com>]

Dave,

On 2008-12-18 11:32, Dave CROCKER wrote:
...
> My assumption was not that the work was "available" for "IETF use".

Correct.
> 
> My assumption was that the IETF owned the work.  Pure and simple.

False. You never implicitly transferred ownership.

> 
> The IETF was free to do whatever the hell if felt like with the work and
> I retained no rights.  Use it.  Give it to another group.

Specifically, "Give it to another group." was never covered until 5378.
That's the entire problem.

   Brian

> Kill it. 
> Whatever.
> 
> Really.  That's the cultural basis that I believe formed this community
> and informed participants in it.
> 
> d/
> 
> ps.  Well, to be more complete, I assumed that IETF ownership meant that
> the document was required to be publicly available and -- though I
> didn't know the term at the time -- there was public permission for
> derivative works by whoever felt like doing the deriving.
> 
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf