----- Original Message -----
From: "Theodore Tso" <tytso@xxxxxxx>
To: "Tom.Petch" <sisyphus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "Simon Josefsson" <simon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <ietf@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 3:44 PM
Subject: Re: RFC 5378 "contributions"
>
> So I wasn't on the IPR working group, but it seems to me that there
> are two separable issues. There is the question of *which* license to
> use for contributions (which might or might not vary based on type of
> contribution, i.e., text vs. code),
To quote Harald quoting Counsel 15 Mar 07
"1 - The legal theory the IETF operates under is that people who contribute
to the IETF process know they are doing so.
....
2 - There is no legal requirement for ANY boilerplate to appear in a
contribution to the IETF. This includes internet-drafts."
so the boiler plate is there ... well, at the behest of the IETF Trust; it is
the contents
of the Note Wells and the referenced BCP that matter more.
> and then there is the question of
> whether we are sticking the entire legal liability and respponsibility
> onto the I-D editors/authors to guarantee/warant that the entire
> document can be released under the the new licensing requirements, and
> that relates quite strongly to the transition issue.
>
and the BCP says
" By submission of a Contribution, each person actually submitting the
Contribution and each named co-Contributor is deemed to have read and
understood the rules and requirements set forth in this document."
which are (inter alia) to grant derivative rights; and also,
"With respect to each Contribution, each Contributor represents that,
to the best of his or her knowledge and ability:
a. The Contribution properly acknowledges all Contributors, including
Indirect Contributors."
so the way I see it, a Contribution (eg an I-D) should acknowledge all relevant
people, ensure all names are there. If that name is of a person within the IETF
process, then I think that grant may now be presumed. If not, then it must be
sought.
>
> Was that second issue discussed by the IPR wg?
In terms of Contributions and Contributors, yes; it is Contributions and
Contributors that formed the taxa of the IPR WG (eg, 26 Nov 2007, 'issue #1515'
and around there, but especially Brian Carpenter's post to 'ISSUE Incoming
5.6'). Editors and authors, well they appeared, but I saw that as something of
an aberration.
Tom Petch
>
> - Ted
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf