Subject: Re: several messages

From: John C Klensin <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 15:59:26 -0500

(I have drastically trimmed the cc list -- those who are not
following the IETF list probably don't care)

--On Friday, January 30, 2009 14:32 -0500 Dean Anderson
<[email-masked]> wrote:

> You are indeed correct about ITU.
> 
> And possibly things have changed at ANSI.  However, my copy of
> ANSI T1.403.01-1999 is copyright 1999 by the Alliance for
> Telecommunications Industry Solutions, not the American
> National Standards Institute (ANSI)

Sorry, you need to understand how ANSI works.   ANSI is not a
standards developer and never has been.  They are an association
or federation that accredits standards bodies.  While there are
some edge cases, an ANSI number/ designation on a standard
basically indicates that the standards developer is an
ANSI-accredited body operating under ANSI rules (which are very
general) and ANSI approved-procedures.  You can actually see
that in the designation of the example you are citing: 

In
   ANSI T1.403.01-1999
the accredited standards committee is "T1" and this is a
document designated by T1 as 403.01, approved (or published) in
1999.  You might see ANSI/T1... instead, or other punctuation,
but the principle is the same.  I'd have to check, but I assume
that the "Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions" is
the current sponsoring body for ASC T1.  "Sponsoring body for an
ASC" is, to a _very_ poor approximation, similar to the ISOC -
IETF relationship.

The actual authors/ editors/ contributors are not T1 or ATIS,
but some human beings or, in the most aggregate, companies who
participate in T1 or its subcommittees.

> ANSI standards (at least this one) also identifies (in a
> forward that is not technically a part of the standard) the
> ANSI members of the T1 committee that approved the standard
> and identifies each member company, member representative, and
> interest being represented.  ANSI also identifies the members
> of the Working Group (T1E1.2 on Wideband Access Interfaces in
> this case), and the participants and officials of that working
> group.

That is normal.  But none of those those folks or organizations
hold any copyright in the final document.  If the contributors
really held onto the copyrights, as you suggested, they
presumably would.  That document belongs, exclusively, to the
SDO (and, again, not to ANSI, which does not claim copyright to
documents).

Since I'm just trying to clarify the obviously factual parts of
this in relation to how other standards development
organizations do things, I'll leave responding to your other
comments, to others if they are so inclined.
>... 

   john

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