Ok, I think (hope) I understand the intention now. How about the
following as a friendly clarifying amendment to the proposed text:
Proposed Yesterday:
c. Derivative Works and Publication Limitations.
If a Contributor desires to limit its publication, or the
Contribution includes pre-5378 Material that may limit the right
to make modifications and derivative works of an IETF
Contribution, one of the following notices must be included.
The notices set forth in clauses (i) and (ii) below may not be
used with any standards-track document, nor with most working
group documents.
The "Proposed Yesterday" text blurs the distinction between c.i/ii
and c.iii. I think that this could be done more clearly, as suggested
in NEW PROPOSED below. In the first sentence of c, the old concept of
clauses
i and ii is preserved. The new concept in iii is treated in the next
sentence.
NEW PROPOSED
c. Derivative Works and Publication Limitations. If a Contributor
desires to limit the right to make modifications and derivative works
of, or to publish, an IETF Contribution that is not a standards-track
document or, in most cases, a working group document, then one of the
notices in clause (i) or (ii) below must be included. If an IETF
Contribution contains pre-5378 Material as to which the IETF Trust has
not been granted, or may not have been granted, the necessary
permissions to allow modification of such pre-5378 Material outside the
IETF Standards Process, then the notice in clause (iii) may be included
by the Contributor of such IETF Contribution to limit the right to make
modifications to such pre-5378 Material outside the IETF Standards
Process.
NEW PROPOSED c.iii. introduction (Notice stays the same)
For consistency and clarity the introduction to c.iii is made to conform
with 6.c as follows
iii. If an IETF Contribution contains pre-5378 Material as to which the
IETF Trust has
not been granted, or may not have been granted, the necessary
permissions to allow modification of such pre-5378 Material outside the
IETF Standards Process:
-----Original Message-----
From: SM [mailto:sm(_at_)resistor(_dot_)net]
Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2009 7:04 PM
To: Contreras, Jorge
Cc: Trustees; ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: RE: [Trustees] Last Call for Comments: Proposed
work-around to thePre-5378 Problem
At 14:24 08-02-2009, Contreras, Jorge wrote:
Sorry for jumping into this thread late, but I would
recommend leaving
6.c and 6.c.iii as proposed in the TLP draft that was circulated.
[snip]
I think "does not wish" is right, as it gives the new Contributor
maximum flexibility in withholding the right to make
non-IETF derivative
works if his Contribution includes pre-5378 Material. I
don't see any
of the proposed changes making this clearer or better.
I'm writing this in plain English. The trustees can convert
it to legalese.
The new Contributor is using text from pre-5378 Material in a
document after RFC 5378 was published. The text was only available
for reuse within the IETF Standards Process as the Contributor has
not been given rights according to RFC 5378 from the author of that
text for reasons stated previously.
The new Contributor would like to say that the document contains
Pre-5378 Material and he/she can only give rights for modifications
within the IETF Standards Process. The new Contributor is unable to
give any rights for non-IETF derivative works as that falls outside
the Internet Standards Process.
This is not about the new Contributor "does not wish" or "elects" to
withhold the rights as he/she does not have a choice in the matter.
Regards,
-sm
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf