Re: [Trustees] Last Call for Comments: Proposed work-around to thePre-5378 Problem

[Ray Pelletier <rpelletier at isoc.org>]

This works for me.

Ray


On Feb 9, 2009, at 1:01 PM, John C Klensin wrote:

> Jorge,
>
> Yes, that takes us much closer, perhaps all the way there, at least  
> for the purposes of this workaround/patch.
>
> IMO, at least.
>    john
>
>
>
> --On Monday, February 09, 2009 12:29 PM -0500 "Contreras, Jorge" <Jorge.Contreras at wilmerhale.com 
> > wrote:
>
> > Ok, I think (hope) I understand the intention now.  How about
> > the following as a friendly clarifying amendment to the
> > proposed text:
> > ...
> > NEW PROPOSED
> >
> > c. Derivative Works and Publication Limitations.  If a
> > Contributor desires to limit the right to make modifications
> > and derivative works of, or to publish, an IETF Contribution
> > that is not a standards-track document or, in most cases, a
> > working group document, then one of the notices in clause (i)
> > or (ii) below must be included.  If an IETF Contribution
> > contains pre-5378 Material as to which the IETF Trust has not
> > been granted, or may not have been granted, the necessary
> > permissions to allow modification of such pre-5378 Material
> > outside the IETF Standards Process, then the notice in clause
> > (iii) may be included by the Contributor of such IETF
> > Contribution to limit the right to make modifications to such
> > pre-5378 Material outside the IETF Standards Process.
> > ...
>
> Much better.  This still, IMO, has the matter of discretion wrong  
> (i.e., it does not appear to apply the extended modification rights  
> even to the new material), but I think it is workable until we can  
> really get things straightened out.
>
> Note to anyone planning an IPR (or 5378-fixup) BOF for IETF 74: in  
> the long term, the question of whether material created and  
> contributed to the IETF after the effective date of 5378 can  
> effectively be exempted from its key provisions by being used in a  
> document containing pre-5738 material is going to be important.   
> Indeed, it is a key part of determining how long the long term will  
> have to extend.  Jorge's text above seems to fuzz that issue over  
> which, I believe, moves it onto the agenda of the BOF.
>
>   john
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf