Hi Jorge -
Take a look at Section 5.4 of RFC 1602, which redefined
the IETF's IP process originally set forth in RFC 1310:
5.4. Rights and Permissions
In the course of standards work, ISOC receives contributions in
various forms and from many persons. To facilitate the wide
dissemination of these contributions, it is necessary to establish
specific understandings concerning any copyrights, patents, patent
applications, or other rights in the contribution. The procedures
set forth in this section apply to contributions submitted after 1
April 1994. For Internet standards documents published before
this date (the RFC series has been published continuously since
April 1969), information on rights and permissions must be sought
directly from persons claiming rights therein.
I hear you and I suppose a very, very risk averse position would hold to
the letter of that document. However, John Levine put it very well when
he said:
Since approximately my entire income depends on copyright law (I write
books), I have looked at Title 17 and its interpretation pretty
closely. I have to conclude that given the facts surrounding the
early RFCs: pre-1976, no copyright notice, many written on government
contract, and a history of widespread copying and reuse without
explicit permission, it'd be extremely hard to make a case that there
were any limits on their use.
I think this is what you folks in the legal profession call a "business
decision." There is a risk to any sort of action. As you know, being
right doesn't mean you won't get sued. But, I'm with John on this one.
RFCs are for all practical purposes in the public domain and it would
be a very gutsy RFC author that went to court and tried to show that
they had systematically defended their copyright over the last X years
and were thus entitled to assert copyright this year.
Carl
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf