Code demands a license acknowledgement which seems excessive for a template.On
Jan 27, 2015 11:22 PM, Brian E Carpenter
<brian(_dot_)e(_dot_)carpenter(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
On 28/01/2015 16:16, John Levine wrote:
IANAL (other disclaimers incorporated by hand-waving), but a
plain-English reading of this indicated that the text gives
permission to modify the text of the template itself.
It does, but I don't see what practical problem this causes.
Templates are functional, so the copyrights on them are pretty thin in
the first place, and once extracted from the RFC without the rest of
the RFC text, what do we care? We've allowed modified versions of
code components for quite a while, and as far as I know that hasn't
caused any problems for the IETF.
I agree, and in fact my first reaction was to wonder why we don't just
lump templates in with code.
Brian