RE: FW: MIB copyright statement

On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:
> > > But even if ISOC does get a non-exclusive grant of copyright, the
> > > point still stands that the standard abbreviated MIB copyright   
> > > notice would be misleading since it mentions ISOC only, and not  
> > > the IEEE, which in this case is the principal copyright holder.  
> > 
> And so we point back to the RFC for the full legal notice.
> I would personally have no problem to adapt the text somewhat
> to also indicate IEEE copy-right. But which lawyer is goin to
> formulate the proper text. The text we now use for MIB modules
> has been passed by our IETF lawyer. If we modify it for this  
> specific MIB module, I guess we need to run it by our lawyer as
> well.
  
True.  I think this discussion may have uncovered some gaps in the
submission-rights draft which is in last call, so I'm going to make
some last call comments with cc: to [email protected] ... that is a
more appropriate venue for discussing this specific issue.

Thanks,

Mike