RE: Copying and licensing....Re: Copying conditions

I like this approach

---
>From Jorge.Contreras@wilmerhale.com  Mon Jan 10 11:48:19 2005
X-Original-To: sob@newdev.harvard.edu
Delivered-To: sob@newdev.harvard.edu
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6556.0
Subject: RE: Copying and licensing....Re: Copying conditions
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 11:48:10 -0500
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: Copying and licensing....Re: Copying conditions
Thread-Index: AcT3L4qcMq9e+QnMR0msC/i+JrdkAgABF6ig
From: "Contreras, Jorge" <Jorge.Contreras@wilmerhale.com>
To: "Harald Tveit Alvestrand" <harald@alvestrand.no>,
	"Scott Bradner" <sob@harvard.edu>
Cc: <ipr-wg@ietf.org>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Jan 2005 16:48:11.0211 (UTC) FILETIME=[2B6C89B0:01C4F734]

>So would it be OK for an I-D author to say something like this:
>
>  In addition to the license given to the IETF, the author declares =
that
>  Copying and distribution of the work, with or without
>  modification, are permitted in any medium without royalty
>  provided the copyright notice and this notice are preserved

Harald,

I suggest that such a statement be put in an IP=20
disclosure statement, just
as though a patent owner were telling the community that it
intends to license its patents on an RF basis.  Putting such
statements in the I-D could become very confusing.

Jorge

-----Original Message-----
From: ipr-wg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ipr-wg-bounces@ietf.org]On Behalf
Of Harald Tveit Alvestrand
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2005 11:01 AM
To: Scott Bradner
Cc: ipr-wg@ietf.org
Subject: Copying and licensing....Re: Copying conditions

This may be hopelessly amateur-lawyerish, but....

is there a reason why the text says "multiple.... copyright statements", =

and does not say "multiple..... licensing statements"?

I get a headache from the discussion of copyright notices, but the=20
IMPORTANT part of the statement that Simon wants to add is his license=20
terms, not his copyright statement.

And what the IETF cares about is that the IETF rights should not be=20
*restricted*.

So would it be OK for an I-D author to say something like this:

  In addition to the license given to the IETF, the author declares that
  Copying and distribution of the work, with or without
  modification, are permitted in any medium without royalty
  provided the copyright notice and this notice are preserved

Or does that make no sense?
(I see lots of corner cases, like the case where portions of the RFC are =

quotes from another RFC that doesn't have such a clause - the "no=20
sublicensing" stuff Jorge mentions applies here. But in theory....)

                  Harald

--On 8. januar 2005 05:04 -0500 Scott Bradner <sob@harvard.edu> wrote:

>>           Copyright (C) 2004, 2005 Simon Josefsso
>>
>>           Copying and distribution of the work, with or without
>>           modification, are permitted in any medium without royalty
>>           provided the copyright notice and this notice are =
preserved.
>>
>> ----------
>>
>> I see no problem with this in an RFC, and I don't see it as
>> conflicting with the ISOC copyright statement. Thoughts?
>
> multiple, potentially conflicting, copyright statements are a problem =
and
> are currently not permitted
>
> see RFC 3667 section 5.4
>
> Scott
>
>

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

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