Stephan Wenger <stewe@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Hi Simon, > > > On 2/11/09 4:43 PM, "Simon Josefsson" <simon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Stephan Wenger <stewe@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >>> [...] >>> The way to address this misalignment is to work in the IETF >>> towards an FSF-compatible patent regime, and not rant about one specific >>> draft that somehow got on the FSF's campaign radar. The best way, IMO, to >>> work towards such a regime, would be that FSF activists, instead of wasting >>> their time on mailbombing, invent great new concepts, protocols, and write >>> them down in the form of Internet drafts, and make them freely available in >>> the IETF and elsewhere. >> >> That's not possible because the IETF policies does not permit free >> software compatible licensing on Internet drafts published by the IETF. >> >> /Simon > > I don't understand why inventing, designing protocols, and writing their > specification down in the form of Internet Drafts according to the IETF > policies would necessarily be incompatible with what some people call "free > software". See RFC 5378: It is also important to note that additional copyright notices are not permitted in IETF Documents except in the case where such document is the product of a joint development effort between the IETF and another standards development organization or is a republication of the work of another standards development organization. Such exceptions must be approved on an individual basis by the IAB. The IETF copying conditions are not compatible with free software licenses (modification is not allowed), and additional copyright notices are not permitted. The vast majority of free software licenses is built on the concept of copyright notices and requires preserving the copyright notice. It is possible for authors to release the document outside of the IETF, but the point above was that it is not possible to do within the IETF. > With a bit of flexibility and good will on both sides, I view this as > entirely possible. The IETF can conduct process experiments if those > were required, including an experiment of temporarily suspending > certain features of its policies. And, perhaps, the "free software" > people could be a little bit more relaxed in insisting on licensing > terms of their initial phases of contributions to the IETF. I'm > personally willing to support such an effort, even I do not see an > immediate benefit for myself. I would support an experiment like this as well. It could for example work by allowing contributors to license their contribution under the BSD license. /Simon _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf