Re: Stupid question: How are "the rights to represent theSponsor"ascodified in BCP78 and BCP79...

[Simon Josefsson <simon at josefsson.org>]

"Bill Fardy" <bfardy at comcast.net> writes:

>>
>> Right, and this is probably a rather common scenario.  The document
>> should be reviewed to make sure it does the right thing in this regard.
>> What I've seen from the discussion so far doesn't convince me that the
>> text is sufficiently clear.
>>
>
> based on bcp78 (4.2.a) why would it not be reasonable for the ietf to assume
> non-individual contributors are agents, and possess the apparent authority
> to transfer rights in their contributions, including those owned by their
> principal, i.e. the entity they work for and/or represent?

I agree that what you suggest would be reasonable.  My reading of
draft-ietf-ipr-3978-incoming-04.txt suggests that this is currently not
the case.  The following paragraph suggests to me that organizations
directly grant rights to the IETF, rather than going indirectly via the
contributor:

   To the extent that a Contribution or any portion thereof is protected
   by copyright or other rights of authorship, the Contributor, and each
   named co-Contributor, and the organization he or she represents or is
   sponsored by (if any) grant a perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive,
   royalty-free, world-wide sublicensable right and license to the IETF
   Trust under all such copyrights and other rights in the Contribution:

(-incoming section 5.3)

/Simon

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