On strictly personal title, this mail does not reflect the position of my employer! The reason I contribute is because I am an alumni of the trust and read the RFCs in nauseating detail.
On 28 Oct 2022, at 23:27, Timothy Mcsweeney wrote:
On 10/28/2022 12:36 PM EDT Keith Moore <moore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Oct 28, 2022, at 12:34 PM, Timothy Mcsweeney <tim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
As I understand it, section-14 of rfc3405 contains the full Copyright. That would include the copyright notice (top sentences ending with All Rights Reserved) and the license below it.
Not a reasonable (or correct) assumption.
Why not?
If I understand and paraphrase your argument well, you feel that that specific rights that were granted by the copyright in 3405 (like the ability to reproduce derivative works) are not explicitly granted in 8958.
If that is your argument then you have missed BCP 78 to which RFC8958 is subject. (For the example of reproduction section 3.3. is relevant)
If it is not your argument then I fail to understand the point you are trying to make.
Either way, expect this to be my only contribution to this thread.
—Olaf
