IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Gendispatch] why the trust is not your lawyer

Brian Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Mon, 31 October 2022 08:45 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D260DC14CF0C; Mon, 31 Oct 2022 01:45:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.103
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.103 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 86DskcmD-jNI; Mon, 31 Oct 2022 01:45:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x232.google.com (mail-lj1-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::232]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0EF40C14CEFC; Mon, 31 Oct 2022 01:45:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x232.google.com with SMTP id b9so867518ljr.5; Mon, 31 Oct 2022 01:45:40 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Yzsqp2thp92JP6AhFDy13ZahegkBQmNFBSUcaUJbkrU=; b=ThCEFUsHt1O1jEG9r1mAd6XTiMUqgicOc1y8pxI0qsvekkEVkSs5vCTL856DTsORaX OSYQA6di9i8Hz1VcFNXG06BYVuzKqPBNG9XbdnzhmFjK4ghFkpBX4LmFvukBiZJPBRwm QUqw23A3eUK1ispWTHk/Z3vpwlYhYUksrNULKUylnNNKp4oa+toU2kLIdo3IZaNxzb8g uVi0lCGOz9IvIp+B3avikqwkds/DYyZMjtzDNUNdfDSB9pm8/OUAz6mAPS6V1cR4l5uG KHEBKKNAqCKwJRokaAxLhtrCRCTg8C14+rpmvqYpljTWUnT4uyp5oSHX+xudexZ+18ww b/ow==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=Yzsqp2thp92JP6AhFDy13ZahegkBQmNFBSUcaUJbkrU=; b=ymUr13Id/0NYeXk7RbgHtlT7JbiPw065MpOGoceZcUulLwJG9krjwZtgIMIYqrRoIM 8ZQIPshproSxyNAyvhNV1VrcttsRJAxTLTgqPOyVu6B2y9wBPTHGHl5q5i31MSGuzF8b 2oVjtzftaT4ViMs2sXjyjqTPqoRIOqsJiX0m2J+JIo/yq0X3qJ81Tq6ehGtN3lCElbzs lwlYufqnp+D7cJnGK7u7UlgHQYwmLafb1fPg8E4c/2QW4CQTnv4fqd0wjTizFfi5Gzxc wpuViVaybFZRX0/E2rNfkZDd7rjCvI+TI4GLMSX/V54H5yKLmwD0umRm+nBmJQyciUOb MOlg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf3JRDnOkXEdmIpmPmg/wKFm9LJmfs4Ybh88GLRNPGE66u47yzRJ X0XeTE4kELbV4DhZc+jfR2rVk9Fz9Rrb3r2HKVfv3qj1Qz8=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM7GdrW1q2JvJDjdAHD/0qYQjMLMA+mccY1YwASG+pnsKkUJ/eh1JcVeT7JC2fFE48yF3SbM17tbkVNsjrN0zbw=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:651c:1784:b0:26f:ed03:a1f7 with SMTP id bn4-20020a05651c178400b0026fed03a1f7mr5014865ljb.30.1667205938929; Mon, 31 Oct 2022 01:45:38 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3729b094-c514-c2e0-7687-63725d7c0db7@taugh.com> <A419BEF3-B61D-443D-9192-8C7821F4AE49@yahoo.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <A419BEF3-B61D-443D-9192-8C7821F4AE49@yahoo.co.uk>
From: Brian Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2022 21:45:26 +1300
Message-ID: <CANMZLAa-YaR7hAZy4Ra2865_rVMxdSQdxvAyOAj4Vd80jHpqqw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Lloyd W <lloyd.wood=40yahoo.co.uk@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>, Jay Daley <exec-director@ietf.org>, GENDISPATCH List <gendispatch@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c1e50305ec50a12b"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gendispatch/Prac7vt9imf9XMk84TBtkprwWOs>
Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] why the trust is not your lawyer
X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: General Area Dispatch <gendispatch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gendispatch>, <mailto:gendispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gendispatch/>
List-Post: <mailto:gendispatch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gendispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gendispatch>, <mailto:gendispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2022 08:45:44 -0000

Lloyd,

RFC9293 contains the "pre-5378" copyright boilerplate, which avoids the
IETF (and the IETF Trust) having to answer your question.

Regards,
    Brian Carpenter
    (via tiny screen & keyboard)


On Mon, 31 Oct 2022, 21:28 Lloyd W, <lloyd.wood=40yahoo.co.uk@dmarc.ietf.org>
wrote:

>
> > On 28 Oct 2022, at 03:27, John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
> >
> > Fortunately, it is very rare for people to write new I-D's that reuse 20
> year old RFCs so this whole discussion is almost entirely hypothetical.
>
> Did RFC9293 updating RFC793 for STD7 expose any copyright issues? I don't
> think RFC793 has a copyright statement, but wouldn't presume 'govt
> contract, therefore no copyright'.
>
> I note that redoing/combining old rfcs is a thing; http got redone into,
> er, four newish rfcs, but you still end up digging through older rfcs for
> edge stuff, telnet/STD8 will likely get all its options combined into one
> rewritten document eventually, then another RFC will move that new document
> to historic, because security, etc etc.
>
> Reworking the greatest popular hits is definitely a thing, and copyright
> will come into play.
>
>
> --
> Gendispatch mailing list
> Gendispatch@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gendispatch
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email