Re: Question about timeline

[Frank Ellermann <nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de>]

Simon Josefsson wrote:

> My point is that -incoming shouldn't be approved until there is a
> working process to give third parties rights according to whatever
> is in -outgoing.  Publishing the documents at the same time doesn't
> meet that objective -- rights are not granted to third parties
> until the IASA reads -outgoing and writes legal text and publish it.

I don't get this, your article started with "obviously":

Obviously outgoing rights MUST be a subset of incoming rights -
or as IIRC Brian put it you can't give away what you don't have.

So let's say some "incoming" memo covering the "outgoing" ideas
is approved in May.  Then the trust starts to collect "incoming"
contributions in May (or after new boilerplates guarantee that
contributors know that the trust does this).

At the same time or later "outgoing" is approved.  Again later
the trust creates some magic formulae trying to implement the
"outgoing" rules.  Then they could wait two months just to see
what happens (and for the appeal timeout).

After that they can state that anything they've collected since
May (with sufficient "incoming" rights) is covered by the new
magic formulae implementing "outgoing".

Only _older_ contributions could have insufficient "incoming"
rights.  Apparently we arrived at different conclusions about
the timing (IANAL etc., you know the drill... :-)

Frank



_______________________________________________
Ipr-wg mailing list
Ipr-wg at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg