John, (From my other e-mail id) It’s a fair point on when to invoke Note Well versus giving more specific detail. As a broad awareness “You need to know these things to participate” it’s a good gateway to those many things. When you get down to a particular question, such as what license applies to this thing I’m looking at, it does seem to be too broad. It’s easy in the case of RFC documents and I-Ds, since the Trust boilerplate applies to all of them and it can be auto inserted easily. For Wiki pages, the style is not to clutter the page too greatly, so having something short, sweet, and accurate is the goal. It may be that we end up after discussing with the lawyers that the best option is labelling pages “Copyright IETF Trust” and refer people to the cheat sheet I mentioned about what license applies to what content types. Another option is that we may remove all copyright notices from wiki pages since notices are not required any longer to establish copyright. For now, what’s been suggested is to remove the blanket “CC by 4.0” since it’s just not accurate for all content. Followed, by the immediate next step of having involved folks talk, have a good exercise of thinking through the best ways to apply RFC5378 to wiki content and Wiki processes, and to have the appropriate legal staff give their advice. -glenn > On Feb 15, 2023, at 4:21 PM, John C Klensin <john-ietf@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > Glenn, > > It helps and thanks. As I tried to say in my note, > rationalizing things and making them consistent is clearly > reasonable and appropriate. But the key issue I raised, which > your explanation does not address, is the invocation of the Note > Well rather than either the underlying documents or a specific > Trust policy on the subject. > > thanks, > john > > > --On Wednesday, February 15, 2023 20:55 +0000 "Deen, Glenn > (NBCUniversal)" <Glenn.Deen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Hi John, >> >> It's less about change any policy or about removing CC by >> 4.0 and is about making sure we're following the rules the >> IETF has selected for its content, and being consistent when >> doing so. >> >> Currently, the Wiki is not consistent since it is calling out >> both CC by 4.0 and Note Well as applying. >> >> The Wiki is showing both on the footer of pages as boiler >> plate: >> >> Content is available under the Creative Commons >> Attribution License, by IETF Trust (CC BY 4.0). All content is >> covered by the IETF Note Well. | Powered by >> Wiki.js<https://wiki.js.org> >> >> And in the basic info on the wiki: >> >> Welcome to the IETF Community Wiki >> This is a community wiki for IETF participants to use. It >> replaces the previous structure of trac wikis where each >> working group/team had its own trac instance. The IETF Note >> Well<https://www.ietf.org/about/note-well/> applies to all >> content on this wiki, and it is referenced on every page. >> >> >> CC by 4.0 is being blanket applied to all pages, and also >> citing Note Well which in turn pulls in BCP 78 and BCP 79 >> which in turn pull in RFC 5378 and its rules for IETF >> Contributions etc. >> >> It may be that the key issue is that the Wiki should not >> blanket apply CC by 4.0 to all content and that individual >> pages need different rules. >> >> What license applies to what content? >> ----- >> If you look at the IETF Trust's cheat sheet on licenses >> (https://trustee.ietf.org/assets/the-ietf-trusts-copyrights-an >> d-licenses/). You'll see that CC by 4.0 is correct for >> use on general information, but not for IETF Contributions. >> >> Content created to help with meetings, room booking, >> instructions to Chairs etc, is all fine with CC by 4.0. >> >> However, working group content – aka stuff that's IETF >> Contributions to the standards making process and should not >> by CC by 4.0 – is also in the wiki. See : >> https://wiki.ietf.org/en/group/mops/rfc9317-additional-resourc >> es >> >> You may note in this second page citation, that the IETF Trust >> boilerplate on copyright also appears in the text. That's >> correct btw for the type of content, but it's in conflict >> with the CC by 4.0 on the page bottom. >> >> Does additional background help? >> >> So not so much as policy change, but more of a making sure the >> IETF is following the rules is has established for its >> different kinds of content. >> >> Regards >> Glenn >> >> >> On 2/15/23, 10:48 AM, "Trustees" <trustees-bounces@xxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >> >> Jay and Trustees, >> >> (I've taken the liberty of copying the IETF list because this >> type of licensing change appears to affect the entire >> community, not just those who are participating in or >> following tools development.) >> >> I think the principle of moving from CC to IETF-specific rules >> is just fine. However, I question whether doing so by >> referencing/ incorporating the Note Well is a good way to >> accomplish that. The problem as I see it is that the Note Well >> is a somewhat informal narrative document that points to other >> things. Those other things get careful review and are clearly >> community consensus documents. The Note Well is more >> explanatory, has been revised with less formal determination of >> community consensus, and has evolved to contain considerable >> material that has nothing to do with IPR. The current version >> now even begins "This is a reminder of IETF policies...". >> Telling someone who is, e.g., about to join a mailing list or >> participate in a meeting to go read the Note Well and >> understand and accept what it includes (directly and by >> reference) is, IMO, fine. But we have changed it many times >> to make it more clear (also a good thing) without detailed >> community review and approval. Nothing wrong with that >> either, as long as it is narrative/ explanatory. But, where >> things move from an explanation to participants and a >> collection of pointers to an actual license, I think that >> license should be referencing primary materials, or at least >> an easily located Trust document that does so, not less formal >> narrative/ explanatory text, especially when the latter >> contains irrelevant material. >> >> best, >> john >> >> >> --On Wednesday, February 15, 2023 15:52 +0000 Jay Daley >> <exec-director@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> This is a heads up that the IETF Trust have asked us to change >>> the licensing on the IETF wiki (and by implication our other >>> user-editable wikis) from CC BY 4.0 to "All content is covered >>> by the IETF Note Well" as they are concerned that our wikis >>> contain contributions to the standards process and these are >>> not normally licensed under CC By 4.0. We will be making this >>> change on Friday. >>> >>> We are also talking to the Trust about how to ensure that >>> contributions to the wiki are managed in accordance with RFC >>> 5378. This may require some significant changes in the >>> contribution and content management model for the wikis. I am >>> hopeful that the Trust will raise this directly with the >>> community in due course. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Trustees mailing list >> Trustees@xxxxxxxx >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listi >> nfo/trustees__;!!PIZeeW5wscynRQ!u-6DtJEpNYWkhWDfMzOCLVE8qp5SUe >> a5-YAWVbPZx1rojHLqWYe2biF63CJOppibXTXoIrZJdsFINrKA0g$<https:// >> urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trust >> ees__;!!PIZeeW5wscynRQ!u-6DtJEpNYWkhWDfMzOCLVE8qp5SUea5-YAWVbP >> Zx1rojHLqWYe2biF63CJOppibXTXoIrZJdsFINrKA0g$> > >
