Re: draft-ietf-ipr-rules-update-00.txt

[Simon Josefsson <jas at extundo.com>]

"C. M. Heard" <heard at pobox.com> writes:

> I agree that there is a distinct lack of clarity, since I too was
> misled by the title of Section 7 and did not look there to see what
> one is actually allowed to do with RFCs.  And I would agree with you
> that this lack of clarity should be fixed.

Agreed.

> However, unlike you, I see no reason not to accept the document
> editor's word that Section 7 gives me the right to copy RFCs and to
> extract MIB modules or executable code.  These things were common
> practice when the WG that produced 3978 was chartered, and the the
> clear intent of the WG (clear, at least, after reviewing the mailing
> list archives) was to leave those practices (the "running code" as
> it were) unchanged.  Note that every RFC still has the words
> "distribution of this memo is unlimited" on the front page (as has
> been the case for every RFC since RFC 1000 or so).

Here we disagree.  So I believe updating the document to provide
clarity on this point would be useful.

When deciding the copying permission I am granted, I believe I should
not have to read through anything but the copying permission.  If the
copying permission is not saying the same thing that was intended, or
what the IETF tradition is, or what the WG intended to say, that is a
problem with the copying permission that should be fixed.

If I start to assume that I have rights to RFCs that are not expressed
in the copying permission, logic dictate that I might as well assume
anything.

Thanks,
Simon

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