headers
Harald Tveit Alvestrand | 2 Jul 2008 19:14
Picon

[Fwd: IPR - Requested session has been scheduled for IETF 72]
Picon Favicon
From: IETF Secretariat <agenda <at> ietf.org>
Subject: IPR - Requested session has been scheduled for IETF 72
Date: 2008-07-02 16:13:36 GMT
Dear Harald Alvestrand,

The sessions that you have requested have been scheduled.
Below is the scheduled session information followed by 
the information of sessions that you have requested.

IPR Session 1 (2 hours)
Thursday, Afternoon Session I 1300-1500
Room Name: Rathcoole
----------------------------------------------

Requested Information:

---------------------------------------------------------
Working Group Name: ipr
Area Name: General Area
Session Requester: Harald Alvestrand
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Harald Tveit Alvestrand | 2 Jul 2008 20:58
Picon

Re: Harald - you assked for another legal opinion - meet Cynthia Stamer Esq... Fw: Interesting article on HR Litigation over personal opinion posts on the Internet

TS Glassey skrev:
> Harald - you asked me for another legal opinion... Here is one.
>
I asked you to present evidence that competent legal counsel thought 
your particular interpretation on the alleged points of law you try to 
intoduce into this discussion was correct and relevant to the IETF's IPR 
rules.

I did not ask you to forward random quotes from random lawyers 
commenting on random issues.

                     Harald
Permalink | Reply | 501 comments |
headers
TS Glassey | 2 Jul 2008 22:03
Picon
Favicon

Re: Harald - you assked for another legal opinion - meet Cynthia Stamer Esq... Fw: Interesting article on HR Litigation over personal opinion posts on the Internet

These are NOT random issues. They pertain to the operations of ANY Formal 
Entity like the ISOC and as such the IETF.

So that said - they also pertain to the IESG and the IETF as well.

Todd Glassey

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Harald Tveit Alvestrand" <harald <at> alvestrand.no>
To: "TS Glassey" <tglassey <at> earthlink.net>
Cc: <ipr-wg <at> ietf.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 10:58 AM
Subject: Re: Harald - you assked for another legal opinion - meet Cynthia 
Stamer Esq... Fw: Interesting article on HR Litigation over personal opinion 
posts on the Internet

> TS Glassey skrev:
>> Harald - you asked me for another legal opinion... Here is one.
>>
> I asked you to present evidence that competent legal counsel thought
> your particular interpretation on the alleged points of law you try to
> intoduce into this discussion was correct and relevant to the IETF's IPR
> rules.
>
> I did not ask you to forward random quotes from random lawyers
> commenting on random issues.
>
>                     Harald
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Ed Juskevicius | 4 Jul 2008 02:52
Favicon

Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents

Greetings!  The purpose of this message is:

1) To advise you that the IETF Trustees are working to develop
   a policy for granting rights in IETF documents as required
   by draft-ietf-ipr-outbound-rights-06.txt
2) To invite your review and comment on a draft version of the
   policy, and
3) To announce that the Trustees have requested the IPR WG
   convene during IETF 72 to take comments on the draft policy,
   face to face, in Dublin; the IPR WG meeting is scheduled
   to meet starting at 13h00 local time on Thursday, July 31st.

The draft policy is available for your review in .doc, .pdf, and
.txt formats at: http://trustee.ietf.org/policyandprocedures.html. 
	
Policy areas covered by this draft document are as follows:

 1. Licenses to IETF Documents within the Standards Process
 2. Licenses to IETF Documents outside the Standards Process
 3. Licenses that are *not* granted
 4. License to Code Components
 5. Pre-Existing Documents
 6. License Limitations
 7. Text (i.e., "boilerplate") to be included in IETF Documents
	 
Please note that several portions of the text in the draft policy
are enclosed in <special> brackets. This is to signify text where
your thoughts and suggestions are particularly invited.
	 
The IETF Trustees would like to be in a position to formally adopt
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Frank Ellermann | 4 Jul 2008 04:56
Picon
Picon

Re: Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents

Ed Juskevicius wrote:

> invite your review and comment on a draft version of the policy

| For ease of reference, Code Components in IETF RFCs may be 
| designated by <LABEL>. 

The <LABEL> is apparently about this -outbound recommendation:

 "define a textual representation to be included in an IETF
  contribution to indicate that a portion of the document is
  considered by the authors (and later the working group, and
  upon approval the IETF) to be code, and to be subject to
  the permissions granted to use code."

Should that get a qualifier such as "where it is not obvious",
and some kind of "end" indicator ?  In mails I sometimes use

~~~ cut ~~~
text
~~~ end ~~~

to indicate snippets, in drafts I got away with indentation.

> review in .doc, .pdf, and .txt formats

At some point in time the boilerplates have to be integrated
in various tools, for that task it would help to have the TXT
version use line length 69, as in an Internet Draft.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Brian E Carpenter | 7 Jul 2008 00:42
Picon

Re: Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents

Hi,

> (y)  all IETF legends, legal notices and indications of 
> authorship contained in the original IETF RFC must also be 
> included where more than <one half> of an IETF RFC is 
> reproduced in a single document or series of related 
> documents.

A half seems like rather a high limit; a short RFC can be
almost 50% boilerplate anyway. I realise we need an objective
rule, so can I suggest "one fifth"?

> For ease of reference, Code Components in IETF RFCs may be 
> designated by <LABEL>.

How about ...may be enclosed between the marks "<CODE BEGIN>"
and "<CODE END>" ?

> a. General Notice for Internet-Drafts. The following text 
> must appear <at the beginning> of each Internet-Draft:

and

> c. Copyright and License Notice. The following notice must be
> contained at the beginning of each IETF Document (including
> RFCs and Internet-Drafts):

"At the beginning" is not good enough for automated checkers.
I suggest "on the first page" in both cases.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 13 comments |
headers
John C Klensin | 7 Jul 2008 01:21

Re: Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents


--On Monday, 07 July, 2008 10:42 +1200 Brian E Carpenter
<brian.e.carpenter <at> gmail.com> wrote:

>...
> Hi,
> 
>> (y)  all IETF legends, legal notices and indications of 
>> authorship contained in the original IETF RFC must also be 
>> included where more than <one half> of an IETF RFC is 
>> reproduced in a single document or series of related 
>> documents.
> 
> 
> A half seems like rather a high limit; a short RFC can be
> almost 50% boilerplate anyway. I realise we need an objective
> rule, so can I suggest "one fifth"?

I would suggest that we would be better served by a little
vagueness here, e.g.,
	
	 ... where a significant excerpt, but certainly no more
	than one-fifth..."

That deliberately doesn't state a simple numerical rule, but
tries to establish the principle that we really expect the
boilerplate to be reproduced in anything but a trivial excerpt.
And if something abusive happens with a shorter excerpt, it
gives us the option of getting a judge to decide.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 5 comments |
headers
Harald Tveit Alvestrand | 7 Jul 2008 01:37
Picon

Agenda, Dublin IPR WG meeting

Meeting: IETF 72, Dublin
Date and time: Thursday, July 31, 1300-1500
Place: Rathcoole room
Chair: Harald Alvestrand <harald <at> alvestrand.no>
Version: 1.0
----------------------------------------------

1300 Agenda bashing, scribe selection, blue sheets

1305 Presentation of proposed IPR licenses from IETF Trust
  Presenter: Jorge Contreras
  Document: http://trustee.ietf.org/policyandprocedures.html

1335 Discussion on whether these proposed procedures are in
  accordance with the IETF wishes, as reported in:
  draft-ietf-ipr-3978-incoming-08.txt
  draft-ietf-ipr-outbound-rights-06.txt

1445 Summary and advice to the trustees

1500 End of meeting

NOTE: I will be off mail starting in a few hours, and lasting mostly 
until the meeting. I will attempt to update the agenda based on mail to 
this list, but don't expect to see version 1.1 until the start of the 
IETF week.

                   Harald
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
TS Glassey | 7 Jul 2008 03:38
Picon
Favicon

Re: Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents

But the content of the non-boilerplate portions of the RFC are what 
represent its core value. That and the vetting framework around it. So 
content wise, RFC's are really boilerplate, dialog/description and the core 
IP itself.

That said it is appropriate to build a standard demarcation way for modeling 
all psuedocode whether that's through XML, ASN.1 or whatever...

Todd

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Brian E Carpenter" <brian.e.carpenter <at> gmail.com>
To: "Ed Juskevicius" <edj <at> nortel.com>
Cc: <ipr-wg <at> ietf.org>
Sent: Sunday, July 06, 2008 3:42 PM
Subject: Re: Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents

> Hi,
>
>> (y)  all IETF legends, legal notices and indications of
>> authorship contained in the original IETF RFC must also be
>> included where more than <one half> of an IETF RFC is
>> reproduced in a single document or series of related
>> documents.
>
>
> A half seems like rather a high limit; a short RFC can be
> almost 50% boilerplate anyway. I realise we need an objective
> rule, so can I suggest "one fifth"?
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |
headers
Simon Josefsson | 7 Jul 2008 12:52
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents

"Ed Juskevicius" <edj <at> nortel.com> writes:

> The draft policy is available for your review in .doc, .pdf, and
> .txt formats at: http://trustee.ietf.org/policyandprocedures.html. 

Hi!  Thanks for publishing this for review.  Here are my comments.

Comment #1:

Regarding section 2:

   ii. to copy, publish, display and distribute unmodified portions of
       IETF RFCs and translations thereof, provided that:

     (x) each such portion is clearly attributed to IETF and identifies
         the RFC from which it is taken,

     (y) all IETF legends, legal notices and indications of authorship
         contained in the original IETF RFC must also be included where
         more than <one half> of an IETF RFC is reproduced in a single
         document or series of related documents.

There is an inconsistency with this text compared to the license for
code components: Consider if the portion of the document extracted is
code.  Being bound to the above restrictions goes beyond what the BSD
license requires.  This complicates license-compatibility review, as the
license on the derived code will be BSD-license plus the above two
clauses.  The combination of these clauses is not a license that has
been reviewed for compatibility with other free software licenses.
Creating yet another free software license is typically regarded as a
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 8 comments |

Gmane