Carl Malamud <carl(_at_)media(_dot_)org> writes:
I thought that wide replication of the series was the whole
point. If there are issues, I thought they had to do with derivative
works. For example, a particularly risk-averse author of a new
book might query whether "publication of 3 random pages from each
RFC" falls within the scope of allowable actions.
It's pretty clear/accepted that RFCs can be copied/reproduced freely
_in their entirety_, at least those that say "distribution unlimited".
What is much less clear is the issues surrounding excerpts, or
derivative works. The original query pretty clearly asked/asserted
whether older RFCs were "in the public domain". That's pretty far
removed from "republication in their entirety".
I would take the position that checking with authors is not necessary
because permission has already been granted for replication of unmodified
RFCs. It would not seem a stretch for the IETF chair, the IAB, and
the RFC Editor to take a similar position.
IANAL, but if you've followed discussions in places like the IPR WG,
it doesn't take much to conclude that this is a complicated space in
which rules interpreted by real lawyers play a big role.
Thomas
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf