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

["David B Harrington" <dbharrington at comcast.net>]

I strongly support keeping the license external to the RFC.

David Harrington
dharrington at huawei.com 
dbharrington at comcast.net
ietfdbh at comcast.net
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:brc at zurich.ibm.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 10:35 AM
> To: Simon Josefsson
> Cc: Joel M. Halpern; ipr-wg at ietf.org
> Subject: Re: Outgoing section 5.5 and draft-josefsson (Re: 
> San Diego meeting slot)
> 
> Simon Josefsson wrote:
> > Brian E Carpenter <brc at zurich.ibm.com> writes:
> > 
> > 
> >>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.
> > 
> > 
> > Let's take this slow.
> > 
> > The above change (if approved etc) would make it harder to 
> include any
> > source code in IETF documents.  Agree, yes/no?
> 
> No! it means that if you want to attach a license to source code
> in an RFC, you do so external to the RFC.
> 
> > Removing source code from IETF documents would decrease the 
> usefulness
> > of the specifications.  Agree, yes/no?
> 
> Yes, but that is not a consequence.
> 
>     Brian
> 
> > 
> > If you answer yes to both, then I hope that you see how I can
claim
> > that this approach is actively working against both the running
code
> > and the stated goals of the IETF.
> > 
> > Working against the IETF's mission could be justified, I suppose,
if
> > there is some strong reason why things have to be in a 
> particular way.
> > I don't see a strong reason here.  Above, I see a weak
justification
> > that "it is confusing".  If something appears to be 
> confusing, I think
> > we should strive towards making it less confusing.  Personally, I
> > don't find this topic that confusing.  A lot of people that work
on
> > free software, myself included, work with material that 
> carry multiple
> > copyright notices every day.  What's confusing about it?
> > 
> > /Simon
> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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