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-----
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=odwg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.