On rescanning (and rescanning) the text, I find that "irrevocable" is
already in there (!), but I have some problems with where to fit "fully
paid up", since it is really only relevant to licensing, while most of the
text talks about "rights".
There is one paragraph that does talk about licensing, in paragraph 7 of
section 3.1, and we can add it there:
It is preferred that Developed Software be
provided and licensed for IASA and IETF use in source
code form, with no ongoing payments.
No binding promises, but our preference is clear.
Makes sense?
--On 11. februar 2005 07:10 -0800 Eric Rescorla <ekr(_at_)rtfm(_dot_)com> wrote:
In reviewing the IASA BCP I noticed a minor issue:
S 2.2 and 3.1 refer to "perpetual right to use, display, etc."
The standard language here typically includes both "royalty-free"
(or "fully-paid up") and "irrevocable". I would particularly think
we want to specify that no future royalties are due.
-Ekr
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf