Just to be clear: there is only one type of copyright. It is created
by statute. There are many different types of copyright licenses,
however. And I think that's what is being discussed here. This being
said, I agree with Steve. The IPR-WG has settled on the BSD license for
licensing Code Components, which is a very open, flexible model.
-----Original Message-----
From: ipr-wg-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:ipr-wg-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Steven M. Bellovin
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2008 10:31 AM
To: TS Glassey
Cc: Simon Josefsson; IETF Discussion; IAOC; Paul Hoffman;
ipr-wg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 20:44:15 -0700
"TS Glassey" <tglassey(_at_)earthlink(_dot_)net> wrote:
Why cant a code object or any embedded licensable IP object be
included under a 'instantaneous' copyright which is noted at the
close of the <CODE> block. Why cant we build a code model where the
code itself includes a separate (c) if its warranted? - this totally
allows the inclusion of copyrighted IP into IETF processes without
messing up too much...
That's a fair question. The intent is to restrict the allowable forms
of copyright -- we don't want certain classes of restrictions in RFCs,
because they limit the utility of the code.
--Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
_______________________________________________
Ipr-wg mailing list
Ipr-wg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf