Re: IETF Last Call for two IPR WG Dcouments

Margaret Wasserman <margaret@thingmagic.com> Fri, 28 March 2008 18:30 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-ietf-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3342828C2E1; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 11:30:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -100.444
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.444 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.007, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xUwQgTh7u6hU; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 11:30:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E8A63A68FC; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 11:30:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A5BD3A68FC for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 11:30:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id esJldQRMlXXQ for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 11:30:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exchange.tm.thingmagic.com (unknown [204.9.221.19]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70E233A6861 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 11:30:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.36.0.26] (76.24.195.210) by exchange.tm.thingmagic.com (10.0.0.9) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.263.0; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 14:30:08 -0400
In-Reply-To: <47ED2FBA.507@isoc.org>
References: <20080324200545.D6E6328C3AE@core3.amsl.com> <87myoji2ut.fsf@mocca.josefsson.org> <47ECFEF8.6050400@joelhalpern.com> <47ED2897.4090307@stpeter.im> <47ED2FBA.507@isoc.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v753)
Message-ID: <2B752728-CE81-40B5-8E66-230D5E504D4F@thingmagic.com>
From: Margaret Wasserman <margaret@thingmagic.com>
Subject: Re: IETF Last Call for two IPR WG Dcouments
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 14:30:06 -0400
To: Ray Pelletier <rpelletier@isoc.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.753)
Cc: Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org>, "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.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://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

Ray Pelletier wrote:
> The Trustees adopted the Non-Profit Open Software License 3.0 in  
> September 2007 as the license it would use for open sourcing  
> software done as work-for-hire and that contributed to it, at that  
> time thinking of code contributed by IETF volunteers.  See:  http:// 
> trustee.ietf.org/licenses.html
>
> Is it clear that the contributions contemplated by these documents  
> would require a different treatment?


Disclaimer:  IANAL, and I apologize if I am misunderstanding  
something about the license you referenced, but...

It seems to me that the "Non-Profit Open Software License 3.0", while  
fine for the source code to IETF tools, places more restrictions and  
more burden on someone who uses the code than we would want to place  
on someone who uses a MIB, XML schema or other "code" from our RFCs.

For example, the license places an obligation on someone using the  
source code to distribute copies of the original source code with any  
products they distribute.  Effectively, this means that anyone who  
distributes products based on MIBs, XML schemas or other "code" from  
RFCs would need to put up a partial RFC repository.  Why would we  
want that?

Margaret

_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf