Re: IPR Trust - draft-carpenter-bcp101-update-02 and the IASA

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

 





--On Tuesday, September 27, 2005 15:41 -0700 "Lucy E. Lynch" <llynch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Tue, 27 Sep 2005, John C Klensin wrote:

Brian,

This is a fine document.  Perhaps appropriately, it doesn't
say much of anything.

Is the actual trust agreement a secret, or does the IETF and
IASA intend to make it public before the IESG approves it?
Will there be an IETF Last Call that includes an opportunity
to review the document itself?

The actual document is still in review and and the on-going
discussions are privileged as they invole outside parties.
I've just sent a summary of our framework to the list (you
anticipated me by a few minutes). The document falls under the
"contracts or equivalent instruments with outside
organizations" and IPR related duties of the IASA as outlined
in section 3 of BCP 101 and as I understand this section is
not subject to IETF Last Call.

But any new BCP, or modification to a BCP is. And, whatever the negotiations might be that you need to get there, this isn't an "agreement with an outside organization", it is how IETF IPR is managed by the IASA and an IASA-relevant organization. A claim that such a body is "outside" seems to me to be dubious in the extreme.

So, while IASA can probably form the trust in private and tell us what has been agreed later, changing the BCP to shift the IETF's rights designations from ISOC to something else requires, IMO clearly, IETF community approval, just as the decisions to shift things _to_ ISOC did. And whether the community would be willing to agree to the draft Brian posted without being able to see _exactly_ how the trust is structured... well, I guess one could try to find out.

We are making our best efforts
to relay information as it becomes available.

Understood and appreciated.

I note that the IASA web pages don't mention this at all
except for a paragraph under "Draft Agreements".  That says

> Proposed IPR Trust
> The IAOC received on May 5th a new draft Trust Agreement
> from CNRI and is in the process of preparing a response.
> The IAOC expects that a revised Trust Agreement will be
> sent to CNRI in early June

See the regular minutes posted here:
http://koi.uoregon.edu/~iaoc/2.html

And is presumably a bit out of date, given comments in the
monthly report you circulated.   And, referring to that
report, it also discusses new draft engagement agreements
with Counsel and other draft agreements which are not
mentioned on the IASA web site, much less available there.

again, please see the minutes.

Lucy, I don't mean to be critical, but the whole IASA arrangement was created to provide a strong and easy-to-use framework for the community to get it work done. From my point of view at least, that translates into keeping things organized enough that the community does not need to read every published set of minutes to know what is going on or to find an important document. IASA has professional staff, that staff should either be keeping web pages up to date or, IMO, the IAOC has a problem which you should be solving on a timely basis, reporting in minutes if you can't solve immediately, etc.

I am sure all of this is fine, but the agreement with the
community when IASA was formed was that all of these things
would be public to the extent possible.  To the extent to
which few or none of them appear to be available, and the
IASA/IAOC does not seem to be able to keep its own web pages
current and the community informed that way, rather than via
just overview monthly reports, I think it should be a matter
of concern to all of us.

we are working within the confines of "to the extent possible"
and hope to be able to share the document soon.

Thank you.
    john


_______________________________________________

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]