Re: Split between -inbound and -outbound (Re: Comments on draft-ietf-ipr-outbound-rights-02.txt)

[Simon Josefsson <simon at josefsson.org>]

Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald at alvestrand.no> writes:

> Simon,
>
> --On 24. januar 2007 22:37 +0100 Simon Josefsson <simon at josefsson.org>
> wrote:
>
>>> While we could write the inbound rights document that way, I was under
>>> the impression that the agreement was that inbound would deal with
>>> contributors granting rights to the IETF, and outbound would deal with
>>> the IETF granting rights to others.  As such, I don't need to address
>>> a hypothetical more complex interaction between the two documents.
>>> I would expect that the required boilerplate would be based on both
>>> documents.
>>
>> Sure.  It is the agreement on that you refer to which I'm questioning.
>> When was this discussed and consensus on the approach declared?  This
>> approach is against the spirit of RFC 3978.  As far as I understand
>> Jorge, he claims that third parties are granted rights to code
>> directly from the contributor by RFC 3978.  I don't see the problems
>> that justify changing that fundamental aspect.
>
> The plan to split into -inbound and -outbound is part of the WG's charter:
>
>> The WG will produce 3 documents:
>>
>> - An update to RFC 3978 (BCP) that attempts to specify a complete set
>> of rights with respect to derivative works granted to the IETF by
>> authors, as well as technical updates necessitated by the existence
>> of the Trust
>> - A document (info) giving advice to the IETF Trust on what rights in
>> IETF contributions it should attempt to grant to the public in order
>> to retain change control while allowing open access, resolving the
>> discrepancy between RFC 2026 and RFC 3978
>> - A document (info) giving other advice to the IETF Trust on IPR
>> handling, based on the IPR WG's experience of discussions in the area

Sure.  I see nothing here that would be in conflict with a rule
similar like RFC 3978 currently has that say third parties are granted
some rights directly from the contributor.

> I do not know any spirit (or letter, for that matter) of 3978 that
> would prevent such a split.

Jorge claims that RFC 3978 give third parties direct rights from the
contributor.  I haven't seen you challenge that interpretation?  Thus,
both the spirit and letter of RFC 3978 appear to be that contributors
grant some rights directly to third parties, without having those
rights go through the IETF.

/Simon

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