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

Re: #1539 proposed resolution: Incoming 5.1 and 5.3: Language referring to contributors' sponsors



The languages needs to

   1)    Define the problem

   2)    Define the IETF's response

3) Define the Relying Party's response when they find they are subjected to a problem like this.

Then the lawyers need to be told specifically what the intent's are so they can make competent statement's about the type of language, whether boilerplate or Scenario-Specific content is needed.

That this group continues to try and create a set of UCC enforceable contracts is amusing.

What needs to happen is to hand this task to Wilmer-Hale and then have this WG approve their output.

Todd
----- Original Message ----- From: "Harald Alvestrand" <harald at alvestrand.no>
To: <Black_David at emc.com>
Cc: <ipr-wg at ietf.org>
Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2007 9:45 PM
Subject: Re: #1539 proposed resolution: Incoming 5.1 and 5.3: Language referring to contributors' sponsors



Black_David at emc.com skrev:
Harald,

This is close (and I'd like to hear Jorge's opinion), but I'm
concerned that "work for hire" may escape.  The failure mode of
concern is that an individual Contributor covered by "work for
hire" grants a copyright license that doesn't bind the employer
(owner of the copyright).  The resulting copyright license may
be simultaneously valid (no legal defects) and vacuous (doesn't
do anything because the Contributor doesn't control the copyright).
It's not clear to me whether the proposed "obtained the necessary
permissions" language in 5.1 is sufficient to block this "valid
and vacuous" copyright license scenario.

While I know what we would like, I think it's more important to
have our legal expert (Jorge) tell us what will actually get the
job done, and hence I'm not going to propose alternate language
in this message.

At the moment, in the absence of a continuous dialogue with legal
counsel, I think the best we can do is to make text that explains to
*us* what we want.

We do have a problem with "valid and vacuous" - what I think the
language is intended to do is to say that if we get into this problem -
the contributor has lied to us.

Another stab at expressing what we want, making it explicit that
work-for-hire is included, so that we can discuss with counsel how to
get a lawyer or judge to understand it the way we want it to be understood:


<OLD>

5.1. General Policy
 By submission of a Contribution, each person actually submitting the
 Contribution, and each named co-Contributor, is deemed to have read
 and understood the rules and requirements set forth in this document.
 Each Contributor is deemed, by the act of submitting a Contribution,
 to enter into a legally-binding agreement to comply with the terms
 and conditions set forth in this document, on his or her own behalf
 and on behalf of the organization the Contributor represents or is
 sponsored by (if any), when submitting the Contribution.  No further
 acknowledgement, signature or other action is required to bind a
 Contributor to these terms and conditions.  The operation of the IETF
 and the work conducted by its many participants is dependent on such
 agreement by each Contributor, and each IETF participant expressly
 relies on the agreement of each Contributor to the terms and
 conditions set forth in this document.

<NEW>

5.1. General Policy
 By submission of a Contribution, each person actually submitting the
 Contribution, and each named co-Contributor, is deemed to have read
 and understood the rules and requirements set forth in this document.
 Each Contributor is deemed, by the act of submitting a Contribution,
 to enter into a legally-binding agreement to comply with the terms
 and conditions set forth in this document.

 The Contributor is further deemed to have agreed that he/she has
 obtained the necessary permissions to enter into such an agreement
 from any party that the Contributor reasonably and personally knows
 may have rights in the Contribution, including, but not limited
 to, the Contributor's sponsor, employer or contractor in a
 work-for-hire relationship.

 No further
 acknowledgement, signature or other action is required to bind a
 Contributor to these terms and conditions.  The operation of the IETF
 and the work conducted by its many participants is dependent on such
 agreement by each Contributor, and each IETF participant expressly
 relies on the agreement of each Contributor to the terms and
 conditions set forth in this document.

_______________________________________________
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