Re: CLOSED #1198 Proposed resolution - Implementation and derivative work

"todd glassey" <todd.glassey <at> worldnet.att.net> writes:

> No Simon - the derivative rights requirement is needed to republish exceprts
> and in modifying them in submitting proposals to the IETF itself.

That is what Harald's proposed resolution says to me when I read it.
I'm not sure that I follow you here.  Are you sure you are talking
about implementations?

Thanks,
Simon

> Todd Glassey
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Simon Josefsson" <jas <at> extundo.com>
> To: "todd glassey" <todd.glassey <at> att.net>
> Cc: "Harald Alvestrand" <harald <at> alvestrand.no>; <ipr-wg <at> ietf.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2006 1:39 PM
> Subject: Re: CLOSED #1198 Proposed resolution - Implementation and
> derivative work
>
>
>> "todd glassey" <todd.glassey <at> worldnet.att.net> writes:
>>
>> > Sorry Harald - the derivative rights requirements can be gleaned from
> this
>> > http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.html#derivative the USD
> Government's
>> > COPYRIGHT.GOV website's FAQ's on Derivative Works...
>>
>> As far as I understood your original issue, I see nothing in that link
>> that support your case.
>>
>> > I suggest that you review the law as it stands and then recant these
> words
>> > since the derivative rights section is also clearly broken - why is it
> that
>> > this group thinks it gets to re-write law.
>>
>> I have reviewed the copyright laws, and my conclusion is consistent
>> with Harald's resolution test: the right to produce a derivative work
>> (i.e., an implementation) of a document is only required if that
>> implementation include or adapt text from the document.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Simon
>>
>> > Todd Glassey
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message ----- 
>> > From: "Harald Alvestrand" <harald <at> alvestrand.no>
>> > To: <ipr-wg <at> ietf.org>
>> > Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2006 12:38 AM
>> > Subject: CLOSED #1198 Proposed resolution - Implementation and
> derivative
>> > work
>> >
>> >
>> >> After having heard the discussion, I conclude that this resolution is
>> >> accepted by the WG, and the issue is closed.
>> >>
>> >> Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
>> >> > I think this has gone on long enough.
>> >> >
>> >> > This is a WG Last Call on issue #1198, with a timeout of one week,
> and
>> >> > I'll close it on February 28.
>> >> >
>> >> > SUGGESTED RESOLUTION:
>> >> > ----------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> > Implementations of IETF standards that incorporate pieces of IETF
>> >> > documents (such as MIBs or data tables) need to have the right to
>> >> > produce derivative works based on those pieces.
>> >> >
>> >> > Implementations of IETF standards that do not incorporate such pieces
>> >> > do not need the right to produce such derivative works.
>> >> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> > I believe that corresponds to the advice of counsel, and to the
>> >> > opinion of the vast majority of this working group.
>> >> >
>> >> > Note that this has absolutely no effect on the need to have rights to
>> >> > practice applicable patents; this is strictly about copyright.
>> >> >
>> >> > I know that Todd Glassey does not agree with this statement. Other
>> >> > people who do not agree with this statement are hereby encouraged to
>> >> > speak up; references to specific case law (in any jurisdiction) that
>> >> > is clearly contrary to this opinion will be appreciated.
>> >> >
>> >> >                 Harald Alvestrand, co-chair of IPR WG
>> >>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> >
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > Ipr-wg mailing list
>> >> > Ipr-wg <at> ietf.org
>> >> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Ipr-wg mailing list
>> >> Ipr-wg <at> ietf.org
>> >> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg