Re: ADMIN: Offtopic warning (Re: Outgoing section 5.5 and draft-josefsson (Re: San Diegomeetingslot))

Give me a chance Harald - I just made the statement this AM. So I need a
reasonable amount  of time to do #2 and #3 so - lets kick it around before
you try and nail me to the cross again OK?

Todd

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Harald Alvestrand" <harald <at> alvestrand.no>
To: "todd glassey" <tglassey <at> earthlink.net>
Cc: <ipr-wg <at> ietf.org>; "'Steven M. Bellovin'" <smb <at> cs.columbia.edu>
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 9:53 AM
Subject: Re: ADMIN: Offtopic warning (Re: Outgoing section 5.5 and
draft-josefsson (Re: San Diegomeetingslot))

> todd glassey wrote:
> > Harald - if you are saying that there is no possibility of reviewing any
> > past decisions and their value or implications based on new legal
> > requirements then how would anything in the IETF get changed.
> >
> note - I have received advice that "offtopic" is not strictly true of
> the statement you made.
> It is within the scope of what the IPR WG could possibly work on, but is
> not related to a current work item.
>
> The steps necessary to change something through a working group are:
> - Get agreement that whatever it is needs changing
> - Get that agreement documented as a chartered work item of a WG
> - Get WG agreement on what the change should be.
>
> So far, your statement has no relevance to steps 2 and 3.
>
> > My commentary stands.
> >
> > Todd Glassey
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Harald Alvestrand" <harald <at> alvestrand.no>
> > To: "todd glassey" <tglassey <at> earthlink.net>
> > Cc: <ipr-wg <at> ietf.org>; "'Steven M. Bellovin'" <smb <at> cs.columbia.edu>
> > Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 2:01 AM
> > Subject: ADMIN: Offtopic warning (Re: Outgoing section 5.5 and
> > draft-josefsson (Re: San Diegomeetingslot))
> >
> >
> >
> >> todd glassey wrote:
> >>
> >>>> Viral licenses should be treated the way any other license is treated
> >>>> by the IETF - the owner of the material can declare the licensing
> >>>> terms on the IETF's IPR page, and the WG can decide whether to accept
> >>>> the licensing terms in the draft.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> No It CAN NOT. The IETF cannot refuse any IP submission without
creating
> >>>
> > a
> >
> >>> tortuous interferrance claim for the Submitter against the IETF and
> >>>
> > those
> >
> >>> WG/AD/IESG members that decided not to 'allow that entity's work to be
> >>> standardized'
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Todd,
> >>
> >> you are raising an off-topic issue again.
> >>
> >> The IETF has decided a long time ago that it has the right to refuse to
> >> make a contribution a standard. RFC 3978 section 3.5:
> >>
> >> 3.5.  No Duty to Publish
> >>
> >>    The Contributor, and each named co-Contributor, acknowledges that
the
> >>    IETF has no duty to publish or otherwise use or disseminate any
> >>    Contribution.
> >>
> >> This is not a current discussion item within this working group's
> >> charter, and is therefore offtopic for this mailing list. Please take
it
> >> elsewhere.
> >>
> >>                       Harald Alvestrand, as WG chair
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>