Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > => I understand better your concern: the problem is about pieces of > code which can be extracted from an RFC, the cannonical example is > a MIB. This is covered in RFC 3667 by 5.2, 5.6 and 7.1e which I > give here: > > e. the right to let third parties extract some logical parts, for > example MIB modules > > So at least your concern was not forgotten... I am sorry to continue this, but I think it is valuable to have a complete discussion in public on record of this. Especially since Harald imply IETF hasn't been aware of this before. I still see two issues: 1) The above does not grant me the right to incorporate text into, e.g., my manual. It seems to me that this should be encouraged and promoted. 2) I cannot find anything about "third parties" in the actual license text, in section 3.3. The (E) clause grant the ISOC/IETF the right to extract, etc code fragments, but doesn't say anything about third parties. Your quote suggest the intention was to address my concern, but to my reading, the intention isn't addressed in the more legally phrased rights grant. Naturally, I may have completely missed it, though. I don't believe this issue is off topic. I agree with Eric Raymond that IETF must make an effort to ensure that the standards can be openly implemented without risking legal consequences. Copying conditions is a minor tangent to those larger IPR issues, but if it cannot be resolved, I see little hope in resolving larger problems. I do agree that fleshing out any details should be moved to the IPR WG. Thanks. _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf