*>
*> > but according to RFC 3667, the only
*> > organization permitted to produce such derivative works would be
*> > ISOC/IETF.
*>
*> this is the way that its been since rfc 2026
*>
*> note that an rfc can be copied in full with no problems
*> and that an author can give permission to produce derivative works
*>
*> its just that the IETF only requests limited rights when
*> receiving a document from an author (the right to publich and the
*> right to produce derivative works within the IETF) all other
*> rights remain with the author(s)
*>
*> Scott
*>
Sorry to come a little late to this discussion; it seems to be a Law of
the Internet that interesting discussions always break out while I am
traveling!
When RFC 3667 was published, the RFC Editor faced the task of
translating its meaning from its lawyerly prose into an RFC
author/consumer centric form. After several go arounds with Scott
Bradner to get our heads straight, we summarized our understanding in:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/copyright.html.
So far, no one has argued with that summary.
Note that this entire thread has been talking only about
IETF-originated RFCs. The wording in 2026 was essentially a lawyerly
translation of the open policy set by Jon Postel many years ago. In
line with that policy, derivative works are allowed without restriction
for independent submissions to the RFC Editor ("RFC Editor
Contribution", in the exquisite language of RFC 3667). This is the
intent of Section 4.2a(C) of RFC 3667 (and RFC 3667bis).
Bob Braden
for the RFC Editor
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf