Re: I-D ACTION:draft-bradner-author-contributors-00 (and -rfc-extracts)

>    This is a proposed update to ^IETF Rights in Contributions^ (RFC 3978
>    - BCP 78).  It proposes a change in the rights required from authors
>    of contributors to the IETF.

I'm in favour of this, and therefore also of draft-bradner-rfc-extracts-01.txt.
These comments apply to both.

1. I assume that this cannot be made retroactive, so I think the final text will
need a few words that make it clear that it does not purport to change the
permissions for all past RFCs.

We will also need words of warning here and on the RFC Editor site that
for RFCs prior to X date, permissions must be sought from the authors.

2. Do we have legal advice that we will not need to require formal signatures
from authors?

3. I think section 5.2 of RFC 3978 needs a slight change:

> 5.2.  Derivative Works Limitation
> 
>    If the Contributor desires to eliminate the IETF's right to make
>    modifications and derivative works of an IETF Contribution (other
>    than translations), one of the two of the following notices may be
>    included in the Status of Memo section of an Internet-Draft and
>    included in a published RFC

We are now not only talking about the IETF's right to make derivative
works, so I suggest deleting "IETF's" in the above paragraph.

4. From a practical viewpoint, we have no choice but to reissue BCP 78.
RFC 2026 doesn't allow for one BCP to consist of more than one RFC. That's
rather annoying, since BCP 79 contains explicit reference to RFC 3978. Any
ideas on how to avoid a reference conundrum would be welcome.

    Brian

_______________________________________________
Ipr-wg mailing list
Ipr-wg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg