Re: [Trustees] Last Call for Comments: Proposed work-around to thePre-5378 Problem

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

 



One more clarification ...
On Feb 8, 2009, at 5:24 PM, Contreras, Jorge wrote:

Sorry for jumping into this thread late, but I would recommend leaving
6.c and 6.c.iii as proposed in the TLP draft that was circulated.

<snip>


6.c

OLD

c. Derivative Works and Publication Limitations.  If a Contributor
desires to limit the right to make modifications and derivative
works of an IETF Contribution, or to limit its publication, one of
the following notices must be included.

PROPOSED
	c. Derivative Works and Publication Limitations.  If a
	Contributor desires to limit its publication, or the
	Contribution includes pre-5378 Material that limits the right
	to make modifications and derivative works of an IETF
	Contribution, one of the following notices must be included.
	The notices set forth in clauses (i) and (ii) below may not be
	used with any standards-track document, nor with most working
	group documents.

The 'or' clause requires a certainty that the Legend at 6.c.iii does not require.
I think it should read:

or the Contribution includes pre-5378 Material that limits
s/limits/ may limit
the right to make modifications and derivative works of an IETF
Contribution, one of the following notices must be included.

Ray



Same issue (other than the problem that there is no antecedent to the
pronoun "its" in line 2).  Using "that limits" in line 3 implies that
the new Contributor must make a legal determination about the rights in
pre-5378 Material, which I do not think is the desired approach.

-----Original Message-----
From: trustees-bounces@xxxxxxxx
[mailto:trustees-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Thomas Narten
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2009 2:02 PM
To: Ray Pelletier
Cc: Trustees; wgchairs@xxxxxxxx; ietf@xxxxxxxx; iab@xxxxxxx;
iesg@xxxxxxxx; rfc-editor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [Trustees] Last Call for Comments: Proposed
work-around to thePre-5378 Problem

Ray,

NEW:

  iii. If a Contribution includes Pre-5378 Material and the
  Contributor is unable (for whatever reason) to obtain the
  necessary permissions to allow modifications of such Pre-5378
  Material to be made outside the IETF Standards Process:

The language suggests a tasking to obtain 5378 licenses from
contributors of pre-5378 material.  I think that is something we
want to avoid.  I think the following language obtains the same
results but with less stress on the participants.

I agree, but that might also be seen to be getting closer to
overruling what RFC 5378 says, something that I understand to be out
of scope.

iii. If a Contribution includes Pre-5378 Material for which the
   Contributor of the pre-5378 material has not or may not have
   granted the necessary permissions to the IETF Trust to allow
   modifications of such Pre-5378 Material to be made outside the
   IETF Standards Process:

IMO, this is improved wording I support it.

Thanks,
Thomas
_______________________________________________
Trustees mailing list
Trustees@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trustees


_______________________________________________

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]