Re: IPR and I-D boilerplate

[Joe Touch <[e-mail]>]

Lloyd Wood wrote:
> Given that a large number of drafts, including even
> draft-bradner-submission-rights-00.txt
> currently end in a boilerplate saying copyright "(year)"
> or an out-of-date year because the boilerplate has been cut and pasted
> from a previous draft, it would be impossible to rely on the
> information that you propose. Draft authors aren't generally awfully
> hot on proofing such details.
> 
> The IETF has mailing list records, where draft submissions are
> announced and ideas are recorded. Isn't that sufficient?

FWIW, the contents of the draft aren't typically mailed; only the 
abstract and title.

Drafts are that - drafts, and are intended to disappear. If there is 
information in them that needs archiving, it either gets issued as an 
RFC (which is archived at the date of issue of the RFC), or can easily 
be documented by other mechansims, e.g., in published papers, personal 
laboratory notebooks, or technical reports. IDs are not tech reports.

Joe