Re: archives (was The other parts of the report....

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



% 
%         One of those terms/conditions was a limited period
%         of publication, after which, the rights revert back
%         to the author(s). 
% 
% ps - look at RFC 3667 section 1 (g)
% 
% Scott

	ah... but said RFC did not exist at the time my IDs 
	went out. and my cursory perusal of said RFC seems
	to indicate that it is mute on materials submitted
	into the IETF process in times that pre-date said 
	RFC existance.  In my case, the drafts in question 
	clearly state the terms/conditions of publication
	by the IETF and where said copywright resides.
	Now perhaps the IETF should have refused publication,
	but it did not... so I believe that the T/C in the
	draft are valid.  Legacy stuff is quite thorny.
	Perhaps MO's law should be called on and one could 
	let sleeping dogs/drafts alone. 
	
	RFC 3667 section 1(g) clearly covers most all new
	drafts, save RFC Editor contributions and material
	that is limited by section 3.3(a)(c) - 

	that said, it could be that the 40,000 or so legacy
	draft authors won't care, but it would be sound hygiene
	to ask them if they mind if RFC 3667 rules would apply
	to their contributions.  

--bill
Opinions expressed may not even be mine by the time you read them, and
certainly don't reflect those of any other entity (legal or otherwise).

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]