Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 17:22:57 -0800 From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com> To: "James Bailie" <jimmy@jamesbailie.com>, <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: RE: Proposed license for IETF Contributions Message-ID: <LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNEENHFCAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com> In-Reply-To: <4380B48C.8080909@jamesbailie.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org >[mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]On Behalf Of James Bailie >Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2005 9:38 AM >To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org >Subject: Re: Proposed license for IETF Contributions > > >Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > > > You might check this but I believe that the Copyright convention > > specifically > > excepts "specifications" from copyright coverage. I think >there's some > > other > > classes of original work that fall under this. How about simply > > rewriting the > > ITEF license to designate any RFC as the complete RFC is a >specification, > > and therefore uncopyrightable. > >I'm not a lawyer, but I strongly believe under the Berne >convention RFCs have copyright. The technical details described >in an RFC may be protected by other IP laws, such as patent law >for example, if the originator chose to patent those details, but >the text of the RFC document itself, describing those details, is >an original composition which satisfies the terms of the >convention. The only means of rescinding copyright is for the >copyright owner to explicitly place the work into the public >domain. > Which is what applying an IETF RFC license that designates the ENTIRE rfc as a SPECIFICATION would do so! Sheesh! >Simon's proposed license seems reasonable to me. Except that it is untried in a court of law. If the author of an RFC simply designates the entire RFC as a specification, by using the IETF license that states "this entire document is a specification" then you have an easy way to play within the already established international understandings of what a specification is. Just because the GNU did it with their own license doesen't mean that this is a good way to go. Ted
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNEENHFCAA.tedm>