Re: Last Call: <draft-jdfalk-maawg-cfblbcp-02.txt> (Complaint Feedback Loop Operational Recommendations) to Informational RFC

[Alessandro Vesely <[e-mail]>]

On 05/Oct/11 20:22, SM wrote:
> The Abstract mentions that:
> 
>   "While not originally written as an Internet Draft, it has been
>    contributed to the IETF standards repository in order to make it
>    easier to incorporate this material into IETF work."
> 
> The "no derivative" clause makes it impossible to incorporate the
> material in this draft in any IETF work.  The restriction is not
> called out correctly in draft-jdfalk-maawg-cfblbcp-02.

IANAL, but my understanding is that one will be able to cite MAAWG's
RFC in other works, thereby /using/ those statements without actually
incorporating protected material literally.  Copyright should protect
the wording, not the technique.  Taking up terminology and quoting
small snippets of text should be fair use:  J.D. himself, wearing a
IETF hat, is drafting a Standard Track I-D (marf-as) that uses the
CFBL BCP that way.