[rfc-i] Copyright and the Independent Stream

[Fred Baker]

OK. Where is the fact that it has no-d-r status recorded?

On Sep 14, 2009, at 3:58 PM, Joel M. Halpern wrote:

> We (the RFC community) have published "No Derivative Works" RFCs  
> before.  These have been used, for example, to publish standards  
> from other bodies where they were making the material available to  
> us, but we did not have the right to further evolve the standard.
>
> Editorial processing (such as book editors and the ISE / RFC  
> Production house perform) are not usually considered derivative  
> works.  (I am sure someone can come up with a counter-example.)  In  
> this case, the thesis is that the author, who has the rights, is  
> requesting RFC Publication in the Independent Stream.  So we clearly  
> have the right to perform that publication.  However, they are not  
> allowing us to give anyone else rights to modify the document.
>
> Yours,
> Joel
>
> Fred Baker wrote:
>> I have read your draft, and I have a question.
>> I have in the past presumed that "no derivative works" implied that  
>> an  internet draft could not be published as an RFC, as an RFC is  
>> itself a  derivative work. A case in which I used that reasoning  
>> related to the  one draft in which I have ever used that status -  
>> one of the inputs to  the SAVI working group. I was asked to  
>> describe what Cisco did in a  particular case, and as the working  
>> group seemed very unwilling to  read Cisco's web page on the topic,  
>> I copied the Cisco web page text  into a no-d-r draft. My viewpoint  
>> was (and is) that even if the  working group wanted to standardize  
>> exactly what Cisco had done, it  should do so as "this is what the  
>> working group decided", not "fine,  do what Cisco does, everyone  
>> else is".
>> What this draft suggests to me is that the RFC *should* be  
>> published,  and that somehow those rights or lack of them should be  
>> recorded in or  recorded regarding the RFC.
>> Help me here? Do I misunderstand the meaning of "no derivative  
>> works"?
>> _______________________________________________
>> rfc-interest mailing list
>> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
>> http://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest