[rfc-i] Copyright and the Independent Stream
fred at cisco.com
Mon Sep 14 15:59:26 PDT 2009
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.
> 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 an internet draft could not be published as an RFC, as an RFC is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
>> rfc-interest mailing list
>> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
More information about the rfc-interest