Re: Sample code

[Simon Josefsson <simon at josefsson.org>]

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com> writes:

>> The
>> current IETF license is an example of such a license (fixed by
>> incoming+outgoing though).  There has been source code examples in RFCs
>> with nasty licenses; if I recall correctly, some does not even permit
>> redistribution.
>>
>> Further, I think the point is that it happens often that the copyright
>> holder on some code haven't released code under IETF's licenses, and it
>> is useful to include the code in an RFC.  The current situation works
>> against the IETF's goal of facilitating wide implementations of
>> standards.  This situation is bad, and your suggested solution isn't
>> realistic.
>
> Why not? We've just done it (twice) for a draft I reviewed.

Which drafts was that?  In the latest example that Russ asked the IPR WG
about, draft-ietf-rmt-bb-fec-ldpc, after discussions, I was told the
solution will be to remove code from the document.

> It would only fail in the case of an uncooperative author, and in that
> case we're stuck anyway.

No, that's missing the point.  In draft-ietf-rmt-bb-fec-ldpc and the
base64 draft, external copyright owners own the copyright on code that
is useful to include in the document.  To be over-precise: it is useful
for the _IETF_, it is not necessarily useful for the copyright owner.

In the cases where the copyright owner(s)

  1) can't be identified or reached,
  2) is unwilling to re-license the work,
  3) is never approached to resolve the issue

it can still happen that it is useful for the IETF to be able to include
code.  The code may be licensed under a widely permissible license.
Still, given how the IETF rules work now (and in the future too), this
is impossible.

The requirement to not include external copyright notice has been
violated several times in RFCs, and I haven't seen an argument that the
requirement is more important than allowing the IETF to work better.  It
makes it impossible to include freely licensed code that would help
documents.  I think the policy should be modified here.

/Simon

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