[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Restriction on the right to modify (Re: Comments on draft-ietf-ipr-outbound-rights-02.txt)

On 2007-01-29 22:48, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: 
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007 20:31:56 +0100
Simon Josefsson <simon at josefsson.org> wrote:

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

WRT the specific instance of "share-alike": Everything I've seen
indicates that mandating share-alike for modifications to IETF code
would be massively controversial.

I think the rules should allow WGs to make such a decision on a
case-by-case basis.  If the argument is that for patents, WGs should
be permitted to make decisions on a case-by-case basis, I believe WGs
should be permitted to make decisions to use material licensed under
the GPL or similar in a document.  If we trust WGs to make the proper
decisions regarding patents, why don't we do so for copyrights?


For patents, the WG members are making individual decisions about
whether they, their employers, or (enough of) the community would
license the patent (or perhaps collectively choose to ignore it).  For
RFCs, the question is granting rights to the IETF's output.

Note that I'm not taking a position; I'm just explaining the
distinction as I see it.


I think that's correct, but I'm willing to state my position:

I think that giving WGs the chance to debate copying and license
conditions each time would be an endless source of ratholing
and should be avoided. So I like the view that if a contributor
wants to grant *more* rights than the IETF, that should be
a matter entirely outside the IETF.

   Brian

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