[rfc-i] Copyrights and the IRTF and Independent Stream

SM sm at resistor.net
Wed Sep 2 10:00:52 PDT 2009

At 17:36 31-08-2009, Leslie Daigle wrote:
>Having pursued this out-of-band with another list reader -- a little bit
>of clarification of my point...
>Looking at the timeline of any given I-D:
>T0:  I-D version -00 is submitted to the drafts repository
>Ts:  I-D is accepted for consideration in a stream approval process
>Ta:  I-D is approved for publication
>Tp:  I-D is published as an RFC
>For IETF work, Ts is when a document is accepted as a working group
>item, or at some (currently not well demarcated) point in the process of
>having it published as an individual RFC reviewed by the IESG.
>One part of the discussion is "what copyright should apply at Tp" --
>IETF is restrictive, the IRTF and Independent streams want more open
>copyright.  Cool.

It's easier to determine what copyright should apply at Tp as we know 
in which stream the RFC is published.

>The other part of the discussion is:  at what point in that timeline
>does the copyright requirement at Tp get applied?

The copyright requirements apply at the time of submission.  If we 
follow that logic, we can have different copyright requirements as we 
iterate through the different versions of the Internet-Draft.

>For IETF processes, there are a number of good reasons why the copyright
>at Ts needs to align with that at Tp:  the IETF needs to know it can
>continue to work on the documents circulated within its processes, and
>so on and so forth.


>In your first note, it seemed the suggestion was you would need to know
>what  stream the document was going to be published in, at T0.  I.e.,
>that you would apply the copyright regime of Tp at T0.  I think that's
>unrealistic, and unnecessary.  How many documents get started as
>personal contributions, aimed at a WG, possibly spending some time
>there, and ultimately getting published as an Independent (stream)
>document?  More than 2....

Setting the stream to follow at T0 (T zero) doesn't allow for changes 
in the path as you described above.  I agree that it is unrealistic 
to apply such a copyright regime.

>So, I think the copyright at T0 should be independent of stream;  that
>there need to be enough valid copyright notices available at T0 to cover
>all streams (though they don't have to be tied to streams); and that as
>documents get considered in a stream (Ts), they could be respun with
>appropriate copyright for the stream (and possibly several iterations of
>that, if the document changes streams).

Even if the copyright at T0 is independent of the stream, there may 
be other issues (Internet Standard Process requirements 
etc.).  There's the case where due to copyright restrictions, text 
from a RFC can only be reused if the submission is through the IETF Stream.


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list