Subject: Consensus(2)? IPR rights and all that

From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 22:36:21 +0100

After a brief trip to the lawyer, and considering current discussion... a 
new suggestion:

Replace principle 6 with the following:

   6.  The IETF, through the IASA, shall have a perpetual
       right to use, display, distribute, reproduce, modify and
       create derivatives of all data created in support of IETF
       activities.

(Jorge liked "perpetual" better than "irrevocable permanent" - the stuff 
after "to" is a well known legal incantation).

And in section 3.1 "IAD Responsibilities", add after paragraph 4 ("The IAD 
negotiates service contracts"):

  The IAD is responsible for ensuring that all contracts give the IASA
  and the IETF the rights in data that is needed to satisfy the principle
  of data access.
  This is needed to make sure the IETF
  has access to the data it needs at all times, and that the IASA can
  change contractors when needed without disrupting IETF work.

  Whenever reasonable, if software is developed under an IASA contract
  it should should remain usable by the IETF beyond the terms of the
  contract. Some ways of achieving this are by IASA ownership or an
  open source license; an open source license is preferrable.
  The IAD will decide how the interest of the IETF is best served
  when making such contracts.

(This is giving the IAD a little more room to maneuver, while still
stating a clear preference.)

Works?

               Harald

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

---

From: Henrik Levkowetz <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 23:18:17 +0100

> stating a clear preference.)

Works for me.

	Henrik

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 10:12:55 +0100

Looks good to me
    Brian

Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
> After a brief trip to the lawyer, and considering current discussion... 
> a new suggestion:
> 
> And in section 3.1 "IAD Responsibilities", add after paragraph 4 ("The 
> IAD negotiates service contracts"):
>

---

From: Sam Hartman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 04:49:36 -0500

>>>>> "Harald" == Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]> writes:

    Harald>    6.  The IETF, through the IASA, shall have a perpetual
    Harald> right to use, display, distribute, reproduce, modify and
    Harald> create derivatives of all data created in support of IETF
    Harald> activities.

    Harald> (Jorge liked "perpetual" better than "irrevocable
    Harald> permanent" - the stuff after "to" is a well known legal
    Harald> incantation).

This works for me provided that the legalese gives us the right to
sublicense these rights to others.

--Sam

---

From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 11:28:53 +0100

> sublicense these rights to others.

That's more than we currently ask people to assign to the IETF when making 
submissions to the IETF (RFC 3667) - there, we ask only for permission to 
use it within the IETF process (which may mean some sublicensing, and may 
not). Not sure what we should write here - I wouldn't want to write 
something here that would require reopening RFC 3667 for consistency.

                      Harald

---

From: Sam Hartman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 05:37:47 -0500

>>>>> "Harald" == Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]> writes:

    Harald> --On tirsdag, desember 07, 2004 04:49:36 -0500 Sam Hartman

    >>  This works for me provided that the legalese gives us the
    >> right to sublicense these rights to others.

    Harald> That's more than we currently ask people to assign to the
    Harald> IETF when making submissions to the IETF (RFC 3667) -
    Harald> there, we ask only for permission to use it within the
    Harald> IETF process (which may mean some sublicensing, and may
    Harald> not). Not sure what we should write here - I wouldn't want
    Harald> to write something here that would require reopening RFC
    Harald> 3667 for consistency.

well, I do happen to think 3667 is broken, but agree with you that we
do not want to open that can of worms at this time.

However if we change contractors, we need to have the necessary rights
to give the new contractor the rights to use our data.  I believe that
is an absolute requirement.

--Sam

---

From: Carl Malamud <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 05:12:08 -0800 (PST)

Sam -

I think you're covered under Harald's language.  Your worry was
"sublicense" ... at the general principle level, that's
certainly clear.  Needless to say, at the implementation level
(the actual contract), the lawyers/IAD/IAOC will want to make
sure the principle made it in.

The current wording: "perpetual right" ... "all data" .. "IETF
activities" is pretty broad.  A new contractor, for example, is
working in support of IETF activities and would be clearly
covered.

Regards,

Carl