Re: [IAOC] Re: The IETF Trust License is too restricted

[Brian E Carpenter]

Lucy E. Lynch wrote:

On Thu, 8 Dec 2005, Simon Josefsson wrote:



Sam Hartman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:



Simon == Simon Josefsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


   Simon Harald Tveit Alvestrand [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
--On tirsdag, desember 06, 2005 13:07:50 +0100 Simon Josefsson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
   
I'd feel more comfortable if the outbounds right issue was
settled, before all IPR is signed away to some external body
that, to me, it seem unclear whether the IETF has total
control over.
 Remember that it's signed away FROM bodies that the IETF has
NO control over.

   Simon My point was that before drafting what conditions the IETF
   Simon Trust should operate under, we should know what kind of
   Simon permissions we want the IETF Trust to be able to grant.

I think it is sufficient the trust be able to operate under any set of
outbound rights we come up with.


That won't be possible, given the current (and even the updated) IETF
Trust agreement.

The IETF may decide that third parties should be given rights to all
contributions, not only to RFCs/I-Ds.

Currently, the IETF Trust would be unable to comply to such a wish
from the IETF, because the Trust agreement prevent them from doing so.



explain please, I don't understand this.

Straw man?


To me, the new phrase IETF
standards-related documents (such as RFCs, Internet Drafts and the
like) clearly covers contributions to the standards process, i.e.
the same scope as RFC 3978. I don't see a problem here.

Brian


___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: [IAOC] Re: The IETF Trust License is too restricted

[Simon Josefsson]

Brian E Carpenter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 Lucy E. Lynch wrote:
 On Thu, 8 Dec 2005, Simon Josefsson wrote:
 
Sam Hartman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

I think it is sufficient the trust be able to operate under any set of
outbound rights we come up with.

That won't be possible, given the current (and even the updated) IETF
Trust agreement.

The IETF may decide that third parties should be given rights to all
contributions, not only to RFCs/I-Ds.

Currently, the IETF Trust would be unable to comply to such a wish
from the IETF, because the Trust agreement prevent them from doing so.
 explain please, I don't understand this.
 Straw man?

 To me, the new phrase IETF
 standards-related documents (such as RFCs, Internet Drafts and the
 like) clearly covers contributions to the standards process, i.e.
 the same scope as RFC 3978. I don't see a problem here.

RFC 3978 define Contributions as:

   c. IETF Contribution: any submission to the IETF intended by the
  Contributor for publication as all or part of an Internet-Draft or
  RFC (except for RFC Editor Contributions described below) and any
  statement made within the context of an IETF activity.  Such
  statements include oral statements in IETF sessions, as well as
  written and electronic communications made at any time or place,
  which are addressed to:

  o  the IETF plenary session,
  o  any IETF working group or portion thereof,
  o  the IESG, or any member thereof on behalf of the IESG,
  o  the IAB or any member thereof on behalf of the IAB,
  o  any IETF mailing list, including the IETF list itself, any
 working group or design team list, or any other list
 functioning under IETF auspices,
  o  the RFC Editor or the Internet-Drafts function (except for RFC
 Editor Contributions described below).

That is considerably more than what even a lax interpretation of IETF
standards-related documents would mean.

So I do see a (minor) problem.

Thanks,
Simon

___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf