Lawrence Rosen allegedly wrote, On 12/13/08 2:04 PM: > The notion is not right, albeit that it is reflected in the current IETF IPR > policy, that a process can be in any way restricted from being improved > because someone planted a copyright notice on its essential description. An > description of a process, method of operation, etc., cannot be locked away > and prevented from amendment and improvement because of copyright. Allowing > that would subject our functional process specifications in IETF to 100-year > copyright monopolies even though there aren't even 20-year patent monopolies > that apply to that specification. Nobody owns those ideas or the essential > descriptions of those ideas; they are public domain. You can improve any technology you want, modulo IPR -- that's not the point here. The problem is taking existing copyrighted text and using it as a base for describing your technology. _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf