Re: Transfers of copyright versus licensing

On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 03:49:18PM -0500, John C Klensin allegedly wrote:
> Hi.

Hi John.  Two things ... 

> Most other standards bodies have an opposite approach to the 
> problem.   They claim, explicitly and with agreement from 
> participants as a condition for making it in the door, either...
> 
> 	* that the participants (and their organizations, if
> 	relevant) derive sufficient benefits from participation
> 	that anything written, said, or otherwise contributed is
> 	a work for hire and hence belongs to the standards body
> 	from the moment of writing or utterance, or
> 	
> 	* at the point that a document becomes a formal part of
> 	the work program, explicit transfers of copyright are
> 	required from all authors and editors.

Could you be more specific about which SDOs do this?

> I _hate_ the idea of the IETF concluding that it needs to move 
> toward that model.   But, if we are going to conclude every year 
> or so that we need a few more rights or a few more releases, or 
> even to debate whether or not we do, there will be a point at 
> which it is simply easier, and better for all concerned, for the 
> IETF to own the documents and license rights back to the authors 
> as appropriate, rather than continuing to try to figure out how 
> to apply rules retroactively or avoid the need to do so.

That sounds good but you also suggested going the other way, and
having the IETF/ISOC gain just the rights they need, and refer all
queries to the author.  If you _hate_ your first idea (which a large
number of the people in the room supported, surprisingly), what do you
think of your second?

swb

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