cvs commit: src Makefile.inc1 src/crypto/openssh sshd.c src/etc Makefile src/etc/gss Makefile mech qop src/etc/mtree BSD.include.dist BSD.root.dist src/gnu/usr.bin/cvs/cvs Makefile src/include Makefile gssapi.h src/include/gssapi Makefile gssapi.h ...

[Doug Rabson]

On Monday 02 January 2006 13:58, Hiroki Sato wrote:
> Doug Rabson <dfr at nlsystems.com> wrote
>   in <200601021311.33317.dfr at nlsystems.com>:
>
> df> The copyright notice for RFC3667 is quite different from that for
> df> RFC2744 (which is what I copied from). The above discussion does
> not df> apply here. In particular the words from RFC2744:
>
>  I do not think so.  For IPv6 manual page replacement, the manual
>  pages in question (e.g. getaddrinfo(3)) were derived from RFC 2292,
>  RFC 2553, and so on, which have almost the same copyright notice.
>  I do not mean copyright violation of RFC 3667 itself.
>
>  The copyright notice does not explicitly state who is permitted
>  to create a derivative work and what a derivative work is.
>  RFC 3978 (revised version of RFC 3667) explains what rights
>  are permitted to whom in detail, and according to it, we cannot
>  write any RFC derived manual pages since IETF and ISOC have
>  non-exclusive right to create such derivative works.
>
>  I think the situation is the same.  Please correct me
>  if I am missing something.

The text in RFC 3978 and RFC 3667 appears (to me - I'm not a lawyer) to 
refer mostly to the rights that authors of RFCs etc. must assign to the 
IETF as part of the publication process. They do describe an optional 
limitation on derivative works that an author may place on the 
resulting RFC (section 5.2). This optional limitation is not present in 
RFC 2744; as a standards track document, it cannot contain such a 
limitation according to RFC 3978.

Again, the copyright notice in RFC 2744 allows derivative works, 
providing that those works reproduce the copyright notice. It does not 
add any other restrictions. In particular, it does not state that only 
IETF and ISOC may make derivative works and it does not allow any later 
document to revoke my right to make a derivative work. I believe that 
this also applies to RFC 2553, for what its worth.