Re: IETF and open source license compatibility (Was: Re: yet another comment on draft-housley-tls-authz-extns-07.txt)

Margaret Wasserman <mrw@lilacglade.org> Thu, 12 February 2009 16:00 UTC

Return-Path: <mrw@lilacglade.org>
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 F3D353A6A39 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 08:00:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 Us3Gfj0vUmGE for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 08:00:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from QMTA06.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net (qmta06.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net [76.96.30.56]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 300133A6848 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 08:00:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from OMTA12.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.44]) by QMTA06.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id F1K51b0040x6nqcA6411Wn; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 16:01:01 +0000
Received: from [10.2.0.63] ([69.33.111.74]) by OMTA12.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id F40k1b00F1cMU3H8Y40nsc; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 16:00:59 +0000
Message-Id: <16723AAB-60B2-43DF-A87C-C94C8CBA232A@lilacglade.org>
From: Margaret Wasserman <mrw@lilacglade.org>
To: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.00.0902121243481.4546@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"; delsp="yes"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v929.2)
Subject: Re: IETF and open source license compatibility (Was: Re: yet another comment on draft-housley-tls-authz-extns-07.txt)
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 11:00:42 -0500
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>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.929.2)
Cc: Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org>, 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: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 16:00:56 -0000

Hi Tony,

On Feb 12, 2009, at 7:45 AM, Tony Finch wrote:

> On Thu, 12 Feb 2009, Jari Arkko wrote:
>>
>> I agree that there are problematic case, but I believe I hope  
>> everyone
>> realizes this is only the case if the RFC in question has code.
>> Otherwise it really does not matter. Only some RFCs have code.
>
> Except that it prevents using the text of an RFC as comments in an
> implementation.

Ummm, no it doesn't...

There are two reasons why I don't believe that this statement could be  
true of RFC text with the either the old or new copyright template:

(1) No copyright actively _prevents_ anyone from doing anything.  You  
may or may not have a license to do something with copyrighted text,  
and if you copy the text without a license, there may be  
consequences.  However, I don't think that anyone actually believes  
that the IETF will track down people who copy RFC text into comments  
and sue them or attempt to get injunctions against them.

(2) Even if the IETF did try to sue you for copying sections of RFC  
text into your source code comments, they'd almost certainly lose, as  
that would probably fall under fair use provisions.

Realistically, the only way you will run into any sort of trouble is  
if you re-publish RFCs, or reuse large sections of RFC text in another  
publication and don't follow the licensing requirements.

Margaret