Silly question. Is this discussion more appropriate to ietf-ipr?
One could argue that ietf-ipr looked at this question for two years
prior to submitting the new boilerplate, and by missing it made it
clear that they weren't adequate to review. That said, there was also
an IETF last call, and none of us detected the issue until Sam brought
it up.
But really - isn't this about IPR?
On Dec 17, 2008, at 1:05 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote:
John C Klensin wrote:
But both your comments and that "can't get it right" issue just
reinforce my view that we either need an escape mechanism for
old text or need a model in which the Trust, not the submitters,
take responsibility for text Contributed to the IETF under older
rules. For the record, I don't know how to make the latter work
(partially because, like you, I try to avoid simulating a
lawyer) and am not proposing it.
I have held off proposing this latter view, because I've assumed it
was obvious and that those expert in the legal issues rejected it.
But from a practical standpoint, it is the most accurate
representation of work done on IETF documents (within the working
gorup structure.)
That is: Working groups are part of the IETF and 'authors' of
working group documents are acting as when writing IETF
documents.agents of the IETF. While there might be underlying
intellectual property owned by the companies that authors work for,
the actual document is commissioned by, and copyright should be
owned by, the IETF.
Let me carry it further: When Erik Huizer and I wrote the first
IETF Working Group Guidelines document, it was at our initiative.
(Well, really, Erik's.) When it was adopted by the IETF, I
automatically assumed that the IETF owned it.
That is, after all, what we assert when outside technology is
brought into the IETF and we insist that they are handing over
"change control". What is change control if not the authority to
make changes to the document?
So when Scott Bradner did the revision to the IETF Working Group
Guidelines document the idea that he had a legal obligation to get
our permission would have -- and certainly now does -- strike me as
silly.
That's me talking as a participant, about pragmatics, not me
pretending to be a attorney, talking about copyright law.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf