On 2009-02-15 03:44, Theodore Tso wrote:
On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 09:12:16AM +1300, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Or afterwards, since the license a contributor grants to the
IETF Trust is non-exclusive. So contributing these words to the IETF
does not affect in any way my ability to do as I wish
Harald Alvestrand har...@alvestrand.no writes:
Simon Josefsson wrote:
actually that's intended to be permitted by RFC 5377 section 4.2:
4.2. Rights Granted for Quoting from IETF Contributions
There is rough consensus that it is useful to permit quoting without
modification of
Simon Josefsson wrote:
I consider the inability to include immutable text in software
released under the GPL a bug in the GPL.
Nobody forces you to use the GPL, so if you perceive a problem I suggest
to use another license for your program. However, the IETF should not
prevent
Simon Josefsson wrote:
Nobody forces you to use the GPL, so if you perceive a problem I suggest
to use another license for your program.
Unless your starting code is using the GPL, then you are forced to use
the GPL and are not *free* to use any other license without permission
from the
Steven M. Bellovin s...@cs.columbia.edu writes:
On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 21:38:44 +0100
Simon Josefsson si...@josefsson.org wrote:
The discussion started by Stephan suggesting that free software
authors publish their work as free standards in the IETF. My point
was that since the IETF disallow
This is getting off-topic, and seems like typical FAQ material, but I'll
reply briefly. I suggest using, e.g., discuss...@fsfeurope.org to get
other people's interpretations. If you want a more authoritative
answer, talk to licens...@gnu.org.
Harald Alvestrand har...@alvestrand.no writes:
Simon Josefsson wrote:
This is getting off-topic, and seems like typical FAQ material, but I'll
reply briefly. I suggest using, e.g., discuss...@fsfeurope.org to get
other people's interpretations. If you want a more authoritative
answer, talk to licens...@gnu.org.
2 - The words of the
A more interesting question is if you can submit somebody else's
public domain work to the IETF. I don't know the answer to that.
Legally, yes; it's public domain. Academic honesty and common courtesy
would demand an acknowledgment.
more than that - the standards process requires an
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 11:48:08 +0100
Simon Josefsson si...@josefsson.org wrote:
Steven M. Bellovin s...@cs.columbia.edu writes:
On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 21:38:44 +0100
Simon Josefsson si...@josefsson.org wrote:
The discussion started by Stephan suggesting that free software
authors publish
Simon Josefsson wrote:
Generally, however, I think this question is very different from where
this thread started. It started, as far as I consider, with Stephan
suggesting that free software authors publish free (as in licensed
under a free software license) standards in the IETF. That is
pasi.ero...@nokia.com writes:
Simon Josefsson wrote:
Generally, however, I think this question is very different from where
this thread started. It started, as far as I consider, with Stephan
suggesting that free software authors publish free (as in licensed
under a free software license)
Harald Alvestrand wrote:
Simon,
the example is at http://counter.li.org/scripts/machine-update. Take a
look.
There is a single file that contains both the program source and the GPL.
I want to release this under the GPL.
Now, I have three possible interpretations:
1 - The words of the
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 12:57:02 +0100 Simon Josefsson si...@josefsson.org
wrote:
Harald Alvestrand har...@alvestrand.no writes:
This seems more or less correct, even though it may sound surprising at
first. More generally, and more clearly expressed, it can be stated as
this: The license for a
On 2009-02-13 16:47, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 21:38:44 +0100
Simon Josefsson si...@josefsson.org wrote:
The discussion started by Stephan suggesting that free software
authors publish their work as free standards in the IETF. My point
was that since the IETF disallow
Simon,
That's not possible because the IETF policies does not permit free
software compatible licensing on Internet drafts published by the IETF.
...
See RFC 5378:
It is also important to note that additional copyright notices are
not permitted in IETF Documents except ...
...
On Thu, 12 Feb 2009, Jari Arkko wrote:
I agree that there are problematic case, but I believe I hope everyone
realizes this is only the case if the RFC in question has code.
Otherwise it really does not matter. Only some RFCs have code.
Except that it prevents using the text of an RFC as
Tony,
Except that it prevents using the text of an RFC as comments in an
implementation.
OK -- I can see how that would be useful, but its not clear to me that
it would necessarily be a blocking requirement. Reality check: I'm
writing this e-mail to you and at least my side application,
Excerpts from Rémi Denis-Courmont on Thu, Feb 12, 2009 03:03:02PM
+0200:
Oh, I was one relevant working group mailing lists. But from my
experience, I was not at all taken seriously, until I started
showing up at the meetings. In other words, remote participation
does _not_ really work, in
Jari Arkko wrote:
Except that it prevents using the text of an RFC as comments in an
implementation.
OK -- I can see how that would be useful, but its not clear to me that
it would necessarily be a blocking requirement.
Jari is right about this. For a bit of perspective, FSF distributes
Tony Finch wrote:
On Thu, 12 Feb 2009, Jari Arkko wrote:
I agree that there are problematic case, but I believe I hope everyone
realizes this is only the case if the RFC in question has code.
Otherwise it really does not matter. Only some RFCs have code.
Except that it prevents using
On Thu, 12 Feb 2009, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
actually that's intended to be permitted by RFC 5377 section 4.2:
Oh, that's nice :-)
Tony.
--
f.anthony.n.finch d...@dotat.at http://dotat.at/
GERMAN BIGHT HUMBER: SOUTHWEST 5 TO 7. MODERATE OR ROUGH. SQUALLY SHOWERS.
MODERATE OR GOOD.
Harald, Margaret, and Simon,
Harald wrote
actually that's intended to be permitted by RFC 5377 section 4.2:
and Margaret wrote:
However, I don't think that anyone actually believes that the IETF
will track down people who copy RFC text into comments and sue them or
attempt to get
Dear Jari et al.;
On Feb 12, 2009, at 12:25 PM, Jari Arkko wrote:
Harald, Margaret, and Simon,
Harald wrote
actually that's intended to be permitted by RFC 5377 section 4.2:
and Margaret wrote:
However, I don't think that anyone actually believes that the IETF
will track down people who
Jari Arkko jari.ar...@piuha.net writes:
Simon,
That's not possible because the IETF policies does not permit free
software compatible licensing on Internet drafts published by the IETF.
...
See RFC 5378:
It is also important to note that additional copyright notices are
not
Jari Arkko jari.ar...@piuha.net writes:
Harald, Margaret, and Simon,
Harald wrote
actually that's intended to be permitted by RFC 5377 section 4.2:
and Margaret wrote:
However, I don't think that anyone actually believes that the IETF
will track down people who copy RFC text into
Simon Josefsson wrote:
Jari Arkko jari.ar...@piuha.net writes:
Simon,
That's not possible because the IETF policies does not permit free
software compatible licensing on Internet drafts published by the IETF.
...
See RFC 5378:
It is also important to note
I disagree Simon.
Free Software authors (for any variety of free software I know of) are
free to submit I-Ds describing protocols that they define.
They can not take their licensed code, with license restrictions, and
put it in the RFC.
The primary reason for this restriction, in my view, is
Joel M. Halpern j...@joelhalpern.com writes:
I disagree Simon.
Free Software authors (for any variety of free software I know of) are
free to submit I-Ds describing protocols that they define.
Sure. And some do...
They can not take their licensed code, with license restrictions, and
put
Some points:
1) Open Source software and 'free software' as defined by the FSF are not the
same thing.
Historically, open source licenses such as BSD and Apache or in the case of
CERN libwww, a grant to the public domain have proved considerably more
effective than GNU copyleft.
The World
Simon Josefsson wrote:
Jari Arkko jari.ar...@piuha.net writes:
Harald, Margaret, and Simon,
Harald wrote
actually that's intended to be permitted by RFC 5377 section 4.2:
and Margaret wrote:
However, I don't think that anyone actually believes that the IETF
will track
For short excerpts, one can use the text anyway and claim fair use,
but larger excerpts can be useful to quote in comments or documentation
and then there is a problem.
This whole line of reasoning does reminds me of stories about camels
jumping through eyse in needles, numbers
On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 22:03:39 +0100, Simon Josefsson si...@josefsson.org
said:
SJ The IETF Trust sub-license third parties rights to code components in
SJ (new) IETF documents under the BSD license, see section 4 of:
SJ http://trustee.ietf.org/docs/IETF-Trust-License-Policy.pdf
Thanks!
Does
Simon Josefsson wrote:
actually that's intended to be permitted by RFC 5377 section 4.2:
4.2. Rights Granted for Quoting from IETF Contributions
There is rough consensus that it is useful to permit quoting without
modification of excerpts from IETF Contributions. Such excerpts may
be
On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 21:38:44 +0100
Simon Josefsson si...@josefsson.org wrote:
The discussion started by Stephan suggesting that free software
authors publish their work as free standards in the IETF. My point
was that since the IETF disallow publishing standards under a license
that is
On 12.02.2009, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
3) Write only campaigns decrease sympathy for the position being promoted.
As someone who mainly acts in read-only mode on this list: regardless of
what one thinks about free software, I think what troubles me most in the
recent campaign is that it has
35 matches
Mail list logo
