Re: Copying conditions

Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu Thu, 07 October 2004 18:36 UTC

Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA09616; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 14:36:45 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CFdFC-0000V9-6c; Thu, 07 Oct 2004 14:44:03 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CFcyy-000235-8I; Thu, 07 Oct 2004 14:27:16 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CFcsb-000106-6L for ietf@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 07 Oct 2004 14:20:45 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA08269 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 14:20:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Received: from turing-police.cc.vt.edu ([128.173.14.107] ident=root) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CFcjk-0005ck-I3 for ietf@ietf.org; Thu, 07 Oct 2004 14:11:35 -0400
Received: from turing-police.cc.vt.edu (IDENT:valdis@turing-police.cc.vt.edu [127.0.0.1]) by turing-police.cc.vt.edu (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id i97I0nmG023910; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 14:00:49 -0400
Message-Id: <200410071800.i97I0nmG023910@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.7.1 07/26/2004 with nmh-1.1-RC3
To: sob@harvard.edu
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 07 Oct 2004 07:30:24 EDT." <20041007113024.D9D4DCBE99@newdev.harvard.edu>
References: <20041007113024.D9D4DCBE99@newdev.harvard.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2004 14:00:49 -0400
X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: a7d6aff76b15f3f56fcb94490e1052e4
Cc: esr@thyrsus.com, Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr, ietf@ietf.org, jas@extundo.com
Subject: Re: Copying conditions
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0312960016=="
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 082a9cbf4d599f360ac7f815372a6a15

On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 07:30:24 EDT, scott bradner said:
> there seems to be an assertion of evil intent here that is not the case

The problem isn't one of current evil intent, the problem is that there's
a hole in the tent that an evilly-intented camel could get far more than just
its nose through.  And implementors are much happier when they live in
camel-proof tents....

> I do not see any problem for the open source community unless that
> community wants to create a new version of TCP and take parts of
> existing IETF RFCs to include in its description of their revised TCP

The threat model that is causing the issue is if $BIG_EVIL_CORP creates a
document that becomes an RFC, the open-source community implement it, and then
$BIG_EVIL_CORP sues them for copyright infringement.  And even if the open-source
side is in the right, the intimidation of the legal fees needed to mount a
defense is formidable.  Unless you can easily point and say "section 3.7(b)
obviously allows this usage of the text", you're in a grey area that's not a
good place to be in a litigious society...

Given the current sorry state of intellectual property in the US legal system,
I don't blame implementors who ask their lawyers to find which particular lines
in the boilerplate give *THEM* (as opposed to the IETF itself) a clear right to
use the text in the manner they need to.

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf