On Mon, 2006-04-10 at 07:28 -0700, Harald Alvestrand wrote: > bmanning@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > not being the RFC editor, the IAB (or member thereof), or even the > > (as yet undefinable) IETF, I am not sure I am qualified to render > > a value judgement here. That said, I am in posession of two bound > > volumes of the collected RFC series as of the date of publication of > > said volumes (modulo delays from the time the collection(s) were assembled > > and the time they were published). One is circa 1995 and the other is > > circa 1997 ... and I know of at least one CD containing the RFC archives > > that has been sold. > > The rules by which the IAB/IESG manage the IETF process have changed > > dramatically in the past four years... so what was once possible/encouraged > > seems now to be treated as suspect or illegal beahviour. Who knows > > if the ISOC/IAB/IESG folks are attempting to claim copywrite on old RFCs (which > > used to claim "Distribution Unlimited")... > I think it's much more a question of "we won't pay your lawyer's bills > if someone sues you over this" than a desire to exert any form of control. > > I think all the IAB, IESG, IETF trust etcetera WISH for all RFCs to be > freely copyable in their entirety. The 'entirety' is the key word here, as the cd's and prints Bill mention contain the unmodified complete RFC's. That is, the versions I read where contained complete unmodified RFC's and I expect them to be that way too. I have to note that I have a good number of books, specifically IPv6 ones, which contain excerpts of varous RFC's, even the newest ones. It's indeed a 'who is going to pay for the lawyer riddle' in most of these IPR/Copyright things ;( Greets, Jeroen
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf