Subject: Re: item for discussion - IAOC Q&A

From: Bob Braden <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 10:56:55 -0800 (PST)

*> 
  *> This particular situation represents the only the "best case" for early 
  *> documents: the authors are available, willing, and they developed the 
  *> documents without the added complications of multiple authors or employer 
  *> interest in the IPR. We're not expecting a landslide transfer of earlier 
  *> RFCs as a result, but we're hoping to set a model and open the dialog with 
  *> other authors.

Lucy,

There should be no problem getting pre-1998 authors to sign such a
document, since it merely memorializes in modern legalese the implicit
agreement between authors and the RFC Editor since the beginning of
time.  In the less legally-toxic atmosphere of the time, authors were
simply assumed to agree with the announced IPR policy (called something
like "Copyright Story", authored by Jon Postel, and available on the
RFC Editor web site for as long as I can remember.  As an early RFC
author, I certainly ASSUMED the contents of your license statement,
and I assume that other authors did as well.

But today the world has an excess of lawyers and we need to keep
them fully employed.

Bob Braden

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

---

From: Arnt Gulbrandsen <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 00:06:12 +0100

Bob Braden writes:
> document, since it merely memorializes in modern legalese the 
> implicit agreement between authors and the RFC Editor since the 
> beginning of time. In the less legally-toxic atmosphere of the time, 
> authors were simply assumed to agree with the announced IPR policy 
> (called something like "Copyright Story", authored by Jon Postel, and 
> available on the RFC Editor web site for as long as I can remember. 
> As an early RFC author, I certainly ASSUMED the contents of your 
> license statement, and I assume that other authors did as well.

I'm on the other end of the spectrum - I wrote most of a single RFC in 
1995-6 and have no memory of ever seeing the "Copyright Story". (I 
wrote the original draft text, Paul Vixie graciously took over at some 
point, when my wrists gave up, and the result was published in October 
1996.)

I assume most/all IETF regulars at the time knew the Copyright Story. 
But tourists like myself could also publish RFCs, and I wouldn't jump 
to conclusions about their/our agreeing with the unstated agreement.

Arnt