Re: [Trustees] Last Call for Comments: Proposed work-around to thePre-5378 Problem

[Marshall Eubanks <[e-mail]>]

On Feb 9, 2009, at 5:26 PM, Thomas Narten wrote:

>> Ok, I think (hope) I understand the intention now.  How about the
>> following as a friendly clarifying amendment to the proposed text:
>
> Sorry, I'm still not happy with the proposed text. I think it is still
> not clear. It is the simple English I have issue with. But maybe I
> have just been looking at this too hard for too long now. :-(
>
>> NEW PROPOSED
>
>> c. Derivative Works and Publication Limitations.  If a Contributor
>> desires to limit the right to make modifications and derivative works
>> of,
>
> Right. This presumably handles the case where the contributer doesn't
> allow anything but publication as an ID. i.e., case (i)
>
>> or to publish,
>
> Publish as what? an RFC?
>
> Also, now we are already getting ambiguous. I assume that "limit the
> right to" prepends this, but this is not 100% clear. Maybe the
> contributer only desires to "publish" the document. :-)
>
>> an IETF Contribution that is not a standards-track
>> document or, in most cases, a working group document,
>
> I'm not sure why this text is needed actually. This text is really
> supposed to point out that documents that don't allow the IETF the
> right to produce derivative works can't normally be WG documents or
> standards track. But that is an implication of the contributer
> choosing to limit derivative works. Normally, the contributor is NOT
> submiting a document with such a restriction because they wish that it
> not be standards track or a WG document.
>
> This clause has been in the document for sometime. I wonder if it is
> even needed at all to address the motivation for using the modified
> boilerplate.
>
>> then one of the
>> notices in clause (i) or (ii) below must be included.
>
> For the above text to be more clear, I'd suggest something like:
>
> NEW PROPOSED
>
>    c. Derivative Works and Publication Limitations.  If a Contributor
>       desires to limit the right to make modifications and derivative

s/desires/needs/

I don't think that "desires" is appropriate here - as John pointed  
out, the contributor has no discretion here, except for their  
judgement as to whether rights are available.

Regards
Marshall



>
>       works of an IETF Contribution, then one of the notices in
>       clause (i) or (ii) below must be included. Note that a
>       contribution with such a clause cannot become a Standards Track
>       document or, in most cases, a working group document,
>
> IMO, the specific clauses (i) and (ii) make it amply clear why one
> would choose one or the other, so no additional elaboration is needed
> above.
>
> The rest of the proposed text:
>
> 	If an IETF Contribution contains pre-5378 Material as to which
> 	the IETF Trust has not been granted, or may not have been
> 	granted, the necessary permissions to allow modification of
> 	such pre-5378 Material outside the IETF Standards Process,
> 	then the notice in clause (iii) may be included by the
> 	Contributor of such IETF Contribution to limit the right to
> 	make modifications to such pre-5378 Material outside the IETF
> 	Standards Process.
>
> is OK with me.
>
> Thomas
> _______________________________________________
> Trustees mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trustees