In message <CAKe6YvN8oTov0FvUtrnR=U092E7KJECyb1+-mECmvp5QKdjh4g@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Vinayak Hegde writes: > On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 3:49 AM, John Levine <johnl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> This discussion of DMCA is useful to me as a non-US resident. > >> > >> Are we sure that the boilerplate included in I-Ds does not constitute a > >> statement by the authors that they have not, as far as they are aware, > >> infringed any copyright? In other words, isn't the boilerplate a > >> pre-emptive counternotice? > > > > It's not, and even if it were, would you want to find out > > retroactively that you've agreed to pay the IETF's legal expenses if > > someone sues about an I-D you posted?. For more information, please > > see this link in the message you just sent. > > > >>> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Copyright_Infringement_Liability_Limita$ > > > > I agree with Elliott that we need a reasonable DMCA policy, keeping in > > mind that it's pretty rare for a document, particularly a non-archival > > one, to be worth the hassle of fighting a DMCA notice. Fighting the > > TZ takedown was absolutely worth it, but it was unusual in the > > material attacked was of high value, and the basis for the notice was > > unusually bogus. Even so, someone had to pay for lawyers to prepare > > the briefs and appear in court, and I wouldn't want the IETF to > > promise to do that casually. > > Also it might be useful for the submitter to sign (rather tick a > tickbox/radio button) an indemnification clause for the IETF before > submitting an I-D. We may as well close up shop if we have to start doing that. Mark -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@xxxxxxx