wdiff draft-braden-independent-submission-01.txt draft-braden-independent-submission-02.txt

Independent Stream R. Braden
Internet-Draft ISI
Updates: 4846 (if approved) J. Halpern
Intended status: Informational Ericsson
Expires: March 19, May 13, 2010 September 15, November 9, 2009

Procedures for Rights Handling in the RFC Independent Stream
draft-braden-independent-submission-01.txt
draft-braden-independent-submission-02.txt

Abstract

This document specifies the procedures by which authors of RFC
Independent Stream documents grant the community "incoming" rights
for copying and using the text. It also specifies the "outgoing"
rights the community grants to readers and users of those documents,
and it requests that the IETF Trust manage the outgoing rights to
effect this result.

Status of this Memo

This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.

Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.

The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

This Internet-Draft will expire on March 19, May 13, 2010.

This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info). document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document.

Abstract

This Code Components extracted from this document specifies the procedures by which authors of RFC
Independent Stream documents grant the community "incoming" rights
for copying and using the text. It also specifies the "outgoing"
rights the community grants to readers and users must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of those documents,
and it requests that
the IETF Trust manage Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the outgoing rights to
effect this result. BSD License.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Rules for Submission and Use of Material . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. Procedures requested of the IETF Trust . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. Patent and Trademark Rules for the Independent Submission
Stream . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

1. Introduction

As the IETF has grown, the process and the community have gotten more
careful about defining the rights relating to copying documents that
are granted by authors to the community, and the corresponding rights
that are granted by the community to readers and users of these
documents.

This document defines the the copyright procedures for RFC
Independent Stream documents. It parallels the procedures for IETF-
produced documents, defined in RFC 5377 [RFC5377] and RFC 5378
[RFC5378].

In summary, submissions in the Independent Stream use the same
submission procedures and mechanisms that are defined in RFC 5378,
and hence require the same "incoming rights" as IETF-stream
documents. This document explicitly defines provides advice to the "outgoing rights"
that are Trustees of the IETF
Trust on "outgoing" rights to be granted to readers and users of
Independent Stream documents, and it explicitly requests the IETF
Trust to manage the rights in accordance with this definition. advice.

This document also specifies the policies with regard to the
disclosure of Patents and Trademarks that may be relevant to a
submission intended for the Independent Stream.

2. Background

The concept of RFC streams in general, and the Independent Submission
RFC Stream in particular, are described in Section 5 of RFC 4844
[RFC4844] and in RFC 4846 [RFC4846]. In general terms, the
Independent Stream continues the long-established tradition in the
Internet community of allowing and encouraging the RFC Editor to
publish documents that are relevant to the community but are not
products of, and do not conflict with, the IETF process. These may
be comments on IETF documents, or they may be other work relevant to
the Internet that historically the RFC Editor has chosen to publish.

With the publication of RFC 5620 [RFC5620], the IETF began a process
shift in which the responsibility for Independent Stream publication
will move to an individual designated by the IAB as the Independent
Stream
Submission Editor (ISE).

Section 8 of RFC 4846 presented the copyright rules for the
Independent Submission stream. The present document is intended to
be fully consistent with that section, and to update it by clarifying
the Trust-based formal procedures that the IETF Trust will use to effect those
rules.

3. Goals

The goal of the Independent Submission Stream of RFCs is to publish
information that is intended to advance the state of the art and the
interoperability of solutions for use in conjunction with the
Internet. As specified in Section 8 of RFC 4846, the community has
determined that this objective will best be met with a liberal
copyright policy on Independent Stream documents. Therefore, the
Independent Stream policy is to allow any individual reading such
documents to use the content thereof in any manner. The only
restriction is that proper credit ("attribution") must be given.
Lawyers describe this liberal policy by saying that this stream
normally permits "unlimited derivative works". (It should be noted
that this liberal policy was always followed by the original RFC
Editor, Jon Postel; in a sense the present document is a
formalization of a 30-year-old policy on RFC copyrights).

However, for a small subset of documents published as Independent
Submissions, it is not reasonable to permit unlimited derivative
works. Examples are proprietary protocols and output from other
standards bodies. In such cases, authors are permitted to request
that the published Independent Stream documents permit no derivative
works.

Note also that this unlimited derivative works policy applies to all
parts of an Independent Stream document, including any code.
Therefore, no separate licensing procedure is required for extracting
and adapting code that is contained in an Independent Stream document
submitted under the (preferred) unlimited derivative works terms. On
the other hand, code may not be extracted and adapted from
Independent Stream documents submitted under the no derivative works
terms.

4. Rules for Submission and Use of Material

Independent Stream authors will submit their material as Internet-
Drafts. These drafts will be submitted to, and stored in, the IETF
Internet-Drafts repository in the same fashion as IETF Internet-
Drafts.

During Internet-Draft submission, authors who intend to submit their
document for publication in the Independent Stream will grant rights
as described in RFC 5378 [RFC5378]. To request that the contribution
be published as an RFC that permits no derivative works, an author
may use the form specified for use with RFC 5378.

The IETF Trust will indicate that, in cooperation with the
Independent Stream Submission Editor, the Trust grants to readers and users
of material from Independent Stream RFCs the right to make unlimited
derivative works, unless the RFC specifies that no derivative works
are permitted. This will permit anyone to copy, extract, modify, or
otherwise use material from Independent Stream RFCs as long as
suitable attribution is given.

Contributors of Internet-Drafts intended for the Independent
Submission Stream will include suitable boilerplate defined by the
IETF Trust. This boilerplate shall indicate compliance with RFC 5378
and shall explicitly indicate either that no derivative works can be
based on the contribution, or, as is preferred, that unlimited
derivative works may be crafted from the contribution.

It should be understood that the final publication decision for the
Independent Stream rests with the Independent Stream Submission Editor
(ISE). Compliance with these terms is not a guarantee of
publication. In particular, the ISE may question the appropriateness
of a "no derivative works" restriction requested by an author. The
appropriateness of such usage must be negotiated among the authors
and the ISE.

5. Procedures requested of the IETF Trust

The Independent Stream Submission Editor requests that the IETF Trust and
its Trustees assist in meeting the goals and procedures set forth in
this document.

The Trustees are requested to publicly confirm their willingness and
ability to accept responsibility for the Intellectual Property Rights
for the Independent Submission Stream. They are also requested to
indicate their willingness and intent to work according to the
procedures and goals defined by the ISE.

Specifically, the Trustees are asked to develop the necessary
boilerplate to enable the suitable marking of documents so that the
IETF Trust receives the rights as specified in RFC 5378. These
procedures need to also allow documents to grant either no rights to
make derivative works, or preferentially, the right to make unlimited
derivative works from the documents. It is left to the Trust to
specify exactly how this shall be clearly indicated in each document.

6. Patent and Trademark Rules for the Independent Submission Stream

As specified above, contributors of documents for the Independent
Submissions stream are expected to use the IETF Internet-Draft
process, complying therein with the rules specified in the latest
version of BCP 9, whose version at the time of writing was RFC 2026
[RFC2026]. This includes the disclosure of Patent and Trademark
issues that are known, or can be reasonably expected to be known, to
the contributor.

Disclosure of license terms for patents is also requested, as
specified in the most recent version of BCP 79. The version of BCP
79 at the time of this writing was RFC 3979 [RFC3979] updated by RFC
4879 [RFC4879]. The Independent Stream has chosen to use the IETF's
IPR disclosure mechanism, www.ietf.org/ipr/, for this purpose. The
Independent Stream Submission Editor would prefer the most liberal terms
possible be made available for specifications published as
Independent Stream documents. Terms which do not require fees or
licensing are preferable. Non-discriminatory terms are strongly
preferred over those which discriminate among users. However,
although disclosure is required, there are no specific requirements
on the licensing terms for intellectual property related to
Independent Stream publication.

7. IANA Considerations

There are no IANA Considerations in this document, as no computer
protocols are discussed, and no code points assigned. This section
may be removed by the RFC Editor.

This document does make specific request of the IASA, as described in
preceding sections.

8. Security Considerations

The integrity and quality of the Independent Stream are the
responsibility of the Independent Stream Editor. This document does
not change those responsibilities.

9. References

9.1. Normative References

[RFC2026] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision
3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996.

[RFC3979] Bradner, S., "Intellectual Property Rights in IETF
Technology", BCP 79, RFC 3979, March 2005.

[RFC4844] Daigle, L. and Internet Architecture Board, "The RFC
Series and RFC Editor", RFC 4844, July 2007.

[RFC4846] Klensin, J. and D. Thaler, "Independent Submissions to the
RFC Editor", RFC 4846, July 2007.

[RFC4879] Narten, T., "Clarification of the Third Party Disclosure
Procedure in RFC 3979", BCP 79, RFC 4879, April 2007.

[RFC5378] Bradner, S. and J. Contreras, "Rights Contributors Provide
to the IETF Trust", BCP 78, RFC 5378, November 2008.

[RFC5620] Kolkman, O. and IAB, "RFC Editor Model (Version 1)",
RFC 5620, August 2009.

9.2. Informative References

[RFC5377] Halpern, J., "Advice to the Trustees of the IETF Trust on
Rights to Be Granted in IETF Documents", RFC 5377,
November 2008.

Authors' Addresses

Robert Braden
USC Information Sciences Institute
4676 Admiralty Way
Marina del Rey, CA 90292
US

Email: braden@isi.edu

Joel M. Halpern
Ericsson
P. O. Box 6049
Leesburg, VA 20178
US

Email: jhalpern@redback.com