Re: List moderator action
Simon Josefsson <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Brian E Carpenter <[email protected]> writes: > On 03-May-26 07:32, Rob Sayre wrote: >> Hi, >> Apologies in advance for being a giant pain. >> Lars Eggert <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> > If you read Section 3.3 of RFC 5378 you will find the “specific >> > context” is about documents. >> It is not. It is about "Contributions" in caps. >> While I agree with the goal of the IESG statement, and the moderator >> actions here, we have to go fix RFC 5378 for this one. > > What needs fixing? It says that the IETF requires the right to make > derivative works of all contributions, which includes emails. > > The final paragraph of section 3.3 allows "no derivative works" > legends only for two special cases: "information about proprietary > technologies" and republishing standards from other SDOs. Most emails > are neither of those cases; therefore "no derivative works" legends > are forbidden. Section 5.3 is clear and uses well-defined terms, and according to the multiple legal advice I've gotten over the years, those are the terms that are binding. Regarding the entire section 3, consider that its title is: 3. Exposition of Why These Procedures Are the Way They Are .........6 The section is written informally and try to explain the legal words in other ways. The introduction of the document re-inforces this: Section 1 provides definitions used in these policies. Sections 3 and 4 of this document explain the rationale for these provisions. Sections 1, 2, 5, and 6 of this document are normative, the other sections are informative. RFC 3979 (BCP 79) [RFC3979] deals with Read that again: Section 3 has no normative bearing. It is unfortunate that the IESG made a statement that enforce a particular legal interpretation which is based on content in Section 3. That puts the IETF into legal jeopardy and opens up for anti-trust and/or anti-openness risks, and harms the reputation of the IETF as an open standardization organization. /Simon
signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 1.2 KB)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQNoBAEWCgMQFiEEo8ychwudMQq61M8vUXIrCP5HRaIFAmn4Sy8UHHNpbW9uQGpv c2Vmc3Nvbi5vcmfCHCYAmDMEXJLOtBYJKwYBBAHaRw8BAQdACIcrZIvhrxDBkK9f V+QlTmXxo2naObDuGtw58YaxlOu0JVNpbW9uIEpvc2Vmc3NvbiA8c2ltb25Aam9z ZWZzc29uLm9yZz6IlgQTFggAPgIbAwULCQgHAgYVCAkKCwIEFgIDAQIeAQIXgBYh BLHSvRN1vst4TPT4xNc89jjFPAa+BQJp4fWRBQkOa+rdAAoJENc89jjFPAa+hWIA /1lQvrJeGlQq50lP6tm99D1zDy7J1tQ3ha4x0Jx7rkFTAP9hpUKuTvm6m1fXyiZV YZlu2+Id/Dq3CIAZvNF+XEr2BLgzBFySz4EWCSsGAQQB2kcPAQEHQOxTCIOaeXAx I2hIX4HK9bQTpNVei708oNr1Klm8qCGKiPUEGBYIACYCGwIWIQSx0r0Tdb7LeEz0 +MTXPPY4xTwGvgUCaeCW1wUJDmqLVgCBdiAEGRYIAB0WIQSjzJyHC50xCrrUzy9R cisI/kdFogUCXJLPgQAKCRBRcisI/kdFoqdMAQCgH45aseZgIrwKOvUOA9QfsmeE 8GZHYNuFHmM9FEQS6AD6A4x5aYvoY6lo98pgtw2HPDhmcCXFItjXCrV4A0GmJA4J ENc89jjFPAa+s7AA+gIIHpBApDpcDj1sKhzDngmpvwQf0VkHme6s+EG7qSgpAQDe /XMrU0c0Pa3ji85cMqZhvzJOFI/soe662lzL0QY3Bbg4BFySz2oSCisGAQQBl1UB BQEBB0AxlRumDW6nZY7A+VCfek9VpEx6PJmdJyYPt3lNHMd6HAMBCAeIfgQYFggA JgIbDBYhBLHSvRN1vst4TPT4xNc89jjFPAa+BQJp4JbXBQkOaottAAoJENc89jjF PAa+RNUA/2faQO/nFT06E+MlhlQdo/0chlQXC5TZMPTVvVBFwoLOAP9xLJK0ow5E jTzYJB4K810AL/Iv6PEOAEgA4cPTHVlbCQAKCRBRcisI/kdFomCMAP4ro/OH6i6K 00i4VamWrZthTRDPAuum8Jx8U/dum6AnzAD9FkV9Ho3+EA9DIANK4QrDKz3a0ezI Xoct9D26YZWejA4= =odwg -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----