Re: IPR Questions Raised by Sam Hartman at the IETF 73 Plenary

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

 



Russ Housley wrote:
Marshall:

My understanding (and IANAL and Jorge is welcome to correct me) is that the IETF does indeed have "sufficient rights to allow re-use of IETF documents within the IETF", and that this is purely concerned with the power of granting modification rights to other parties.

This is not a very common occurrence as far as I can tell, and so in some sense
this is a corner case.

You are correct that the rights for the IETF Standards Process are already in place, at least for every contribution made after RFC 2026 was published. However, RFC 5378 does not include a provision for a contribution that does not grant all of the required rights.

Even if the IETF Trust were to never make use of any rights beyond the IETF Standards Process, these additional rights must be granted under the requirements of RFC 5378. If a person cannot obtain the necessary rights, then that person cannot make a contribution to the IETF. This was the consensus of the IPR WG and the IETF, and the IETF is now operating under the resulting process BCP.

Russ
Which changes the IETF from arguably a pure R&D NPO to a IP Licensing House with a portfolio worth at the very least the hundreds of millions spent on producing it.

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
------------------------------------------------------------------------


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.9.16/1840 - Release Date: 12/9/2008 4:53 PM


_______________________________________________

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

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