Subject: RE: Comments to WG meeting

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 20:00:31 -0400

Don, 

> > I would hope not, because the BSD license is GPL compatible, and the
> > condition would be that as a consequence of accepting code under a
> > BSD-like license, one agrees to license modifications to that code
> > (and only that code) under a BSD-like license.
> 
> That's actually not the case for the BSD license; it doesn't require
> you to license modifications under the BSD. (That is common practice,
> though.) [But since we agree on the goals, it's possible I may be
> misunderstanding you.]

Right, what I'm proposing would be an additional condition over and above
a BSD-like license.  

> > I'd prefer a structure where the IETF unambiguously has the legal
> > rights to re-use modified RFC code excerpts.
> 
> AFAICT, the only way to do that is with some kind of copyleft license,
> which has the practical problems with GPL compatibility above.

Let's focus on the goals and let the IETF Trust engage legal experts
to figure out what is possible and can be done simply.  If this can't
be done in a GPL-compatible fashion, then it can't be done, but I'd
like to try.

OTOH, perhaps Larry can settle this issue right now, as I respect
his expertise on what licenses such as the GPL permit.  The question
is essentially "would a BSD-like license carrying the additional
condition that modifications to the licensed code be relicensed
(at least to the IETF) under the same license be GPL-compatible?"

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: Simon Josefsson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 10:08:01 +0200

> Right, what I'm proposing would be an additional condition over and above

That would not be compatible with either the BSD or the GPL license.

BSD people would reject the idea because your condition doesn't permit
them to use the code in proprietary products.  This right is one of
the essential properties of the BSD license.

GNU people would like your approach, since it is a copyleft free
license, but since it is GPL incompatible, it would be problematic.
You could use the GPL instead, it basically says the same.

Microsoft and other closed source vendors would not like the license
because it doesn't permit them to use the code in proprietary
products.  I don't think they are interested in having a legal
responsibility of contributing any changes back to the community.

If it doesn't work for the BSD, GNU or Microsoft-alike vendors, I
don't see many kind of vendors left, so I don't think this will fly.

[Of course, when I'm speaking for others here, I do so based on my
experience of what those organizations would say.  If they would chime
in the discussion, that would be helpful.]

> (at least to the IETF) under the same license be GPL-compatible?"

Having Larry answer that one would be fine, but if the answer is
anything but "No" I'd like to challenge it.

The free software community review licenses for compatibility
continuously, so this kind of question is not new.

/Simon

---

From: "Lawrence Rosen" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 08:45:58 -0700

> continuously, so this kind of question is not new.

I agree with Simon. This combination of reciprocity for IETF and
permissiveness otherwise is not acceptable in an open source license.

/Larry Rosen

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Simon Josefsson [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 1:08 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: Comments to WG meeting
>

---

From: "todd glassey" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2006 07:10:08 -0700

It would be if the Open Source License was against one of the Prototype Code
Stacks used to implement the Standard.

Todd