Re: Copying conditions
2004-10-07 07:22:40
At 13:59 07/10/2004, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
a. "IETF": In the context of this document, the IETF includes all
individuals who participate in meetings, working groups, mailing
lists, functions and other activities which are organized or
initiated by ISOC, the IESG or the IAB under the general
designation of the Internet Engineering Task Force or IETF, but
solely to the extent of such participation.
So this means that Simon Josefsson is allowed to exercise the rights Scott
quoted and incorporate the executable pieces into running code, but the
guy on the next desk, who isn't on any IETF mailing list, is not, even
though they work on the same project, for the same employer, under the
same laws. If he joins an IETF list (any IETF list), he's allowed to.
I wish we could read this this way. But I am embarassed by the "but
_solely_ to the _extent_ of such _participation_". May not that mean that
the third party must be on one of the IETF mailing list of the area of the
matter he wants to quote, or that it must interact reasonably about it? Is
a lurker having the same rights as a de facto co-author acting in a WG?
Also, drafts are presented by WGs. Are the true authors the quoted authors
or are the WG retaining parts of the rights? When a new concept is
suggested by a WG member and aggregated to someone's draft who is to give
the authorization to quote it? This would also mean that subscribing to an
open mailing list would modify legal rights, this registration should then
be notarized in a way. Since many mail names can be used, there should be a
IANA IETF Members list (there is a IANA Corporate list). When is a
subscription ended - when I remove myself from the list or when I cease
reading my mails?
In most of the cases there will not be any issue. But if someone starts
objecting and suing someone else it will mean the case is worth it and
lawyers will certainly discuss these points and many others. This would
then have a brutal impact on the whole Internet standard process because
unprepared.
For example, there is no IETF definition I am aware of for the term "domain
name". There are many quotes of it in documents, contracts, legislations.
Is someone claiming paternity of it, so I can ask him/her the permission to
quote his description? I chose the term "domain name" on purpose because
most of its use today in the world is now in relation to DNS. And many
processes are carried which use the term in a different meaning than the
RFCs. Would not the IETF's attitude about this key and core term make
jurisprudence in case someone object for a less important term?
jfc
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- RE: Copying conditions, (continued)
- Re: Copying conditions, Florian Weimer
- Re: Copying conditions, Margaret Wasserman
- Re: Copying conditions, Sam Hartman
- Re: Copying conditions, Michael Richardson
- Re: Copying conditions, Florian Weimer
- Re: Copying conditions, Simon Josefsson
- Re: Copying conditions, scott bradner
- Re: Copying conditions, Harald Tveit Alvestrand
- Re: Copying conditions,
JFC (Jefsey) Morfin <=
- Re: Copying conditions, Simon Josefsson
- Re: Copying conditions, Francis Dupont
- Re: Copying conditions, Francis Dupont
- Re: Shuffle those deck chairs!, Kai Henningsen
- Re: Shuffle those deck chairs!, Sam Hartman
- Re: Shuffle those deck chairs!, Dean Anderson
- Re: Shuffle those deck chairs!, Harald Tveit Alvestrand
- Re: Shuffle those deck chairs!, Vernon Schryver
- Re: Shuffle those deck chairs!, Ted Hardie
- Re: Shuffle those deck chairs!, Dave Crocker
|
|
|