Re: Proposed Revisions to the IETF Trust Legal Provisions (TLP)
"Tom.Petch" <sisyphus@dial.pipex.com> Wed, 24 June 2009 12:24 UTC
Return-Path: <sisyphus@dial.pipex.com>
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 1445A3A6C7D; Wed, 24 Jun 2009 05:24:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.177
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.177 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.422, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 uw9Z6hquEEh5; Wed, 24 Jun 2009 05:24:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mk-outboundfilter-5.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-outboundfilter-5.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DACBD3A6A86; Wed, 24 Jun 2009 05:24:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Trace: 171936124/mk-outboundfilter-5.mail.uk.tiscali.com/PIPEX/$PIPEX-ACCEPTED/pipex-customers/62.188.105.164/None/sisyphus@dial.pipex.com
X-SBRS: None
X-RemoteIP: 62.188.105.164
X-IP-MAIL-FROM: sisyphus@dial.pipex.com
X-SMTP-AUTH:
X-MUA: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
X-IP-BHB: Once
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AugEAJeyQUo+vGmk/2dsb2JhbACDK4wrwmAJhAIF
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.42,282,1243810800"; d="scan'208";a="171936124"
X-IP-Direction: IN
Received: from 1cust164.tnt2.lnd9.gbr.da.uu.net (HELO allison) ([62.188.105.164]) by smtp.pipex.tiscali.co.uk with SMTP; 24 Jun 2009 13:04:23 +0100
Message-ID: <003601c9f4bb$52a24e00$0601a8c0@allison>
From: "Tom.Petch" <sisyphus@dial.pipex.com>
To: Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org>, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
References: <B7008260-2BA6-4529-B4F6-1D0D3D9E7AEA@americafree.tv><87y6rjl71b.fsf@mocca.josefsson.org><4B6B5BD406D71F18567967CB@PST.JCK.COM> <87hby7ufva.fsf@mocca.josefsson.org>
Subject: Re: Proposed Revisions to the IETF Trust Legal Provisions (TLP)
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 11:25:32 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Cc: Trustees <trustees@ietf.org>, ietf list <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: "Tom.Petch" <sisyphus@dial.pipex.com>
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
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>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 12:24:59 -0000
---- Original Message ----- From: "Simon Josefsson" <simon@josefsson.org> Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 5:30 PM > John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> writes: > > > Assuming that I'm not the only one who sees the recent patterns > > as problematic > > I don't think you are alone with that impression. The process you > outline (posting preliminary versions in draft-* form) sounds great to > me. Mmmmm ... I think that one thing that the ipr working group got absolutey right was the decision not to try and craft legally suitable wording for intellectual property rights, rather delegating that task. This sounds like a suggestion to restart the ipr wg, perhaps in the hope of getting a different outcome:-) I would however agree with the suggestion that a complicated (to me as a lay person) document should be accompanied by a non-legally binding lay explanation, eg as to why it is thought suitable to cut the review period from 28 to 14 days, or why a reference to the BSD licence should be thought adequate. Tom Petch > I suggested it earlier, and the IETF Trust response was at least > not negative to the idea. Hopefully it can be implemented. This would > also solve the problem of recording the history of document drafts, and > making sure documents are readily available via IETF mirrors even if the > main site is down or material is removed from it, which is another > concern today. > > /Simon
- Proposed Revisions to the IETF Trust Legal Provis… Marshall Eubanks
- Re: [IAB] Proposed Revisions to the IETF Trust Le… John C Klensin
- Re: Proposed Revisions to the IETF Trust Legal Pr… Simon Josefsson
- Re: Proposed Revisions to the IETF Trust Legal Pr… Russ Housley
- Re: Proposed Revisions to the IETF Trust Legal Pr… John C Klensin
- RE: [Trustees] Proposed Revisions to the IETF Tru… Contreras, Jorge
- Re: Proposed Revisions to the IETF Trust Legal Pr… Simon Josefsson
- Re: [Trustees] Proposed Revisions to the IETF Tru… Andrew Sullivan
- RE: Proposed Revisions to the IETF Trust Legal Pr… Yaakov Stein
- Re: Proposed Revisions to the IETF Trust Legal Pr… Joel M. Halpern
- Re: Proposed Revisions to the IETF Trust Legal Pr… Simon Josefsson
- RE: Proposed Revisions to the IETF Trust Legal Pr… Yaakov Stein
- Re: Proposed Revisions to the IETF Trust Legal Pr… Sam Hartman
- RE: [Trustees] [IAB] Proposed Revisions to the IE… Contreras, Jorge
- Re: Proposed Revisions to the IETF Trust Legal Pr… Robert Elz
- Re: Proposed Revisions to the IETF Trust Legal Pr… Tom.Petch
- Re: Proposed Revisions to the IETF Trust Legal Pr… Tom.Petch
- Re: Proposed Revisions to the IETF Trust Legal Pr… Simon Josefsson
- RE: [Trustees] [IAB] Proposed Revisions to the IE… John C Klensin
- Re: Proposed Revisions to the IETF Trust Legal Pr… John C Klensin
- Re: [Trustees] Proposed Revisions to the IETF Tru… Scott O. Bradner
- Re: [Trustees] Proposed Revisions to the IETF Tru… Scott O. Bradner
- Re: [Trustees] Proposed Revisions to the IETF Tru… Marshall Eubanks
- Re: [Trustees] Proposed Revisions to the IETF Tru… Marshall Eubanks
- Appeal/Request for Review (was: Re: Proposed Revi… John C Klensin
- Re: [Trustees] Proposed Revisions to the IETF Tru… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Trustees] Proposed Revisions to the IETF Tru… Marshall Eubanks
- Re: [IAB] [Trustees] Proposed Revisions to the IE… Russ Housley
- Re: [IAB] [Trustees] Proposed Revisions to the IE… Doug Ewell
- Re: [IAB] [Trustees] Proposed Revisions to the IE… Russ Housley
- Re: [Trustees] Proposed Revisions to the IETF Tru… Scott O. Bradner
- Re: [Trustees] Proposed Revisions to the IETF Tru… Henk Uijterwaal
- Re: [Trustees] Proposed Revisions to the IETF Tru… Scott O. Bradner
- Re: [Trustees] Proposed Revisions to the IETF Tru… Doug Ewell
- Re: [Trustees] Proposed Revisions to the IETF Tru… Ray Pelletier
- Re: [Trustees] Proposed Revisions to the IETF Tru… John C Klensin
- Re: [Trustees] Proposed Revisions to the IETF Tru… Henk Uijterwaal
- Re: [Trustees] Proposed Revisions to the IETF Tru… Henk Uijterwaal
- Re: [Trustees] Proposed Revisions to the IETF Tru… Scott O. Bradner
- Re: [Trustees] Proposed Revisions to the IETF Tru… John C Klensin
- Re: [Trustees] Proposed Revisions to the IETF Tru… Scott O. Bradner
- Re: [Trustees] Proposed Revisions to the IETF Tru… Eliot Lear
- Re: [Trustees] Proposed Revisions to the IETF Tru… Fred Baker
- Re: [Trustees] Proposed Revisions to the IETF Tru… Pete Resnick
- Re: [Trustees] Proposed Revisions to the IETF Tru… Henk Uijterwaal
- Re: Appeal/Request for Review (was: Re: Proposed … Margaret Wasserman
- Re: Appeal/Request for Review (was: Re: Proposed … Russ Housley
- Re: Appeal/Request for Review (was: Re: Proposed … Marshall Eubanks