Subject: RE: GPL and Status summary, IPR WG

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 19:44:27 -0500

David, 

> I would like to be sure I understand what you are saying; can you clarify 
> "If an open source implementation makes useful changes to that sort of
"code",
> > it'd be nice to be able to get them back without having to make
> > gratuitous changes courtesy of legal issues. 
> 
> "useful changes" (can you give an example of a useful change to a
> standard such as a MIB or SMI?), 

At the risk of venturing into a domain where you're an expert and
I'm not, consider RFC 4113's update of the UDP MIB, which is based
on prior UDP MIBs.  Suppose that the MIB source (SMI) had been
developed in an open source project under GPL with the participation
of a number of authors/programmers, and someone decides that IETF
standardization of the result would be a good idea.

> "get them back" (from where and for what purpose? How would that fit
> into the IETF process?), and

"get them back" = "submit in an Internet-Draft".  Consider code
that is distributed under the GPL and only the GPL.  Putting that
code into an Internet-Draft is a violation of the GPL unless
"fair use" applies.  In essence, the GPL requires that recipients
receive rights to modify the code in accordance with the GPL.
Since those rights don't accompany an Internet-Draft, in this
situation, the GPL prohibits distributing that code in an
Internet-Draft.

> "gratuitous changes".

In order to work around the problem in the previous paragraph, one
could rewrite the code without functional change for the sole/primary
purpose of putting it in an Internet-Draft.  While this is possible,
it seems wrong to create situations by default where it is required.
In the hypothetical situation described here, this would be necessary
if one could not obtain the permission of every author/programmer to
submit the Internet-Draft.

Thanks,
--David
----------------------------------------------------
David L. Black, Senior Technologist
EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
+1 (508) 293-7953             FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786
[email-masked]        Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
----------------------------------------------------

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

---

From: "David B Harrington" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 19:51:59 -0500

Thanks, that makes your point clearer.

David Harrington
[email-masked]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> Sent: Monday, January 09, 2006 7:44 PM
> To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> Subject: RE: GPL and Status summary, IPR WG
> 
> David, 
>

---

From: "todd glassey" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 17:21:45 -0800

I dont believe that you can differentiate between reprinting of code and
other derivative uses, as far as the IETF's use models are concerned they
are pretty much the same, which means that the only thing that really needs
to be done is the derivative license - that substantially simplifies the
whole licensing issue.

todd