On Fri, 15 Oct 2004, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
Paul Vixie <paul(_at_)vix(_dot_)com>:
eric is saying that the previous situation
whereby a draft author surrendered the IPR before RFC publication was
better.
various others have said "but what if the IPR terms try to distinguish
between commercial and noncommercial?" my observations are (1) there are
ways to do "open source" without this distinction, and (2) authors cannot
be expected warrant their IPR surrender in any case.
In fact, the *only* way to do open source is without this distinction.
I actually wish it were otherwise, but my wishes have no effect on the
logic of the situation.
Why do you say that?
The mail system could fork. Then it would become social darwinism of the
emails. Someone may even reimplement uucp. It would be email chaos for a
bit.
--
<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond</a>
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
sleekfreak pirate broadcast
http://sleekfreak.ath.cx:81/
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf