Re: Outgoing section 5.5 and draft-josefsson (Re: San Diego meeting slot)

[Brian E Carpenter <brc at zurich.ibm.com>]

Joel M. Halpern wrote:
> Well, I sure understood the rough consensus of the working group to be 
> "everyone can use the code any way they want."

I agree, but (as for text) this is inevitably limited by any
copyright restrictions placed by the author on top of what the
IETF says. Given that we are not asking for all possible
inbound rights, I don't see how to avoid doing something.

I would suggest changing this:

   However, the IETF does not wish to have IETF
   Contributions contain additional copyright notices and licenses, as
   that introduces a number of additional difficulties.

into

   However, the IETF believes it is confusing for IETF Contributions
   to contain additional copyright notices and licenses, and wishes
   such material to be external to IETF documents.

(I'm thinking that a registry of copyright and license conditions,
somewhat similar to our existing IPR disclosure database, might work.)

    Brian
> I originally was in favor of a more restricted view, and came around to 
> the unlimited perspective.
>
> I would be very uncomfortable if every author could slap any 
> restrictions they want on the code in RFCs.
> That would seem to distinctly fail the agreed goal.
>
> And that's why 5.5 is written the way it is, I think.
> We want to allow other licenses.  But those licenses can not prevent 
> people from using code in RFCs according to the IETF goal.
> And, according to the WG agreeement, we are not trying to craft legal 
> language in the RFC.
>
> Yours,
> Joel M. Halpern
>
> At 06:37 AM 10/5/2006, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
>
> > > Finally, I think section 5.3 is wrong to imply that "everyone can use
> > > the code" is a required goal.  It is certainly a good goal, but
> > > sometimes the only options are to either not include code at all, or
> > > include code with a license that results in not everyone being able to
> > > use it.  In those situations, I think the choice is simple.
> > That seems like a good basis for updating 5.3 - after all, we're 
> > trying to document what we want to accomplish....
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ipr-wg mailing list
> Ipr-wg at ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg

_______________________________________________
Ipr-wg mailing list
Ipr-wg at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg