IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: Including the GPL in GPL code (Re: IETF and open source license compatibility)

<Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com> Fri, 13 February 2009 13:06 UTC

Return-Path: <Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 242143A6A86 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Feb 2009 05:06:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id C9MQFHyvdy9A for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Feb 2009 05:06:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mgw-mx06.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [192.100.122.233]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A8303A67F7 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Feb 2009 05:06:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from vaebh106.NOE.Nokia.com (vaebh106.europe.nokia.com [10.160.244.32]) by mgw-mx06.nokia.com (Switch-3.2.6/Switch-3.2.6) with ESMTP id n1DD6Eri018717; Fri, 13 Feb 2009 15:06:24 +0200
Received: from esebh102.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.138.183]) by vaebh106.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 13 Feb 2009 15:06:11 +0200
Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.8]) by esebh102.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 13 Feb 2009 15:06:11 +0200
Received: from nok-am1mhub-06.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.10) by NOK-AM1MHUB-04.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.8) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.291.1; Fri, 13 Feb 2009 14:06:10 +0100
Received: from NOK-EUMSG-01.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.106]) by nok-am1mhub-06.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.10]) with mapi; Fri, 13 Feb 2009 14:06:10 +0100
From: Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com
To: simon@josefsson.org
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 14:06:09 +0100
Subject: RE: Including the GPL in GPL code (Re: IETF and open source license compatibility)
Thread-Topic: Including the GPL in GPL code (Re: IETF and open source license compatibility)
Thread-Index: AcmN0k6r2DeR+jwZR8+4vKvEJdU7SgACJXiA
Message-ID: <808FD6E27AD4884E94820BC333B2DB7727E7A18CBE@NOK-EUMSG-01.mgdnok.nokia.com>
References: <87bpt9ou7d.fsf@mocca.josefsson.org> <C5B8BAE5.30347%stewe@stewe.org> <87k57vlwfu.fsf@mocca.josefsson.org> <49941899.5010506@piuha.net> <alpine.LSU.2.00.0902121243481.4546@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk> <499447D1.6060600@alvestrand.no> <87mycrjsuz.fsf@mocca.josefsson.org> <4994AE67.7050007@alvestrand.no> <87r622iq1p.fsf@mocca.josefsson.org> <49954E44.3030704@alvestrand.no> <87iqneio0p.fsf@mocca.josefsson.org> <4995588F.6090805@alvestrand.no> <87bpt6im7l.fsf@mocca.josefsson.org>
In-Reply-To: <87bpt6im7l.fsf@mocca.josefsson.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Feb 2009 13:06:11.0433 (UTC) FILETIME=[D7C7F590:01C98DDB]
X-Nokia-AV: Clean
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 13:06:21 -0000

Simon Josefsson wrote:

> Generally, however, I think this question is very different from where
> this thread started.  It started, as far as I consider, with Stephan
> suggesting that free software authors publish "free" (as in licensed
> under a free software license) standards in the IETF.  That is not
> possible, and is unrelated to the question we discuss here.

BTW, why cannot a free software author license some particular
standards text under both RFC 5378 terms, and some other license
(a free software license, or even GPL)?

Presumably, he/she owns the copyright, and 5378 terms are
non-exclusive.  Obviously, for collaborative efforts this may require
that all copyright holders agree, and that may make this unpractical.
But I wonder if there was some other reason?

Best regards,
Pasi

v2.35.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status