Re: Rights in early RFCs

[Miles Fidelman <[e-mail]>]

On 6/14/19 7:43 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:

> On 14 Jun 2019, at 16:14, Scott Bradner wrote:
>
>>> On Jun 14, 2019, at 7:06 PM, John C Klensin <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>
>>> There were several later rounds of conversations about the
>>> general topic on which Scott Bradber would be m8ch more expert
>>> than I am, but I'd be surprised if the answer from him would be
>>> significantly different from the above.
>>
>> It is not
>>
>> but I do have a question for John Levine - what is the context of 
>> your question?
>>
>> republish? produce a revision? ???
>
> Oddly, I can answer that one. Some people quite outside the IETF want 
> to publish a spec for how to do $foo over the Internet. Their spec 
> quotes small parts of various RFCs to make the requirements clear for 
> the vendors who will implement $foo because those vendors do not 
> normally use IETF standards. They were unsuccessful in finding how to 
> get permission to quote from RFCs, and by circuitous route got to me. 
> I passed them along to the IETF Trust, and that's where John's message 
> originates. (Side-note: they didn't know who Jon Postel was or how to 
> reach him to ask about getting the right to quote RFC 768. I had to 
> break that news to them...)
>
>
That would seem to fall under fair use.  How could quoting a spec NOT be 
considered fair use.

Miles Fidelman



-- 
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.  .... Yogi Berra

Theory is when you know everything but nothing works.
Practice is when everything works but no one knows why.
In our lab, theory and practice are combined:
nothing works and no one knows why.  ... unknown