From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qk0-x22b.google.com (mail-qk0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::22b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8896F3B2A4 for ; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 15:17:57 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-qk0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id h201so12771676qke.1 for ; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 12:17:57 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=bzUVkbk/vcl/k73yTpJPb8tDXnvCniu7RfbUjOIPjEU=; b=ndRCkDpH7gsFbKyZbX0F5Cf6OKBx/kpwXH4+qpe1yvLKH39GP3vczLRQq8Fk27HvbO 9L1vg4R7k7nEURjW2DyAt39DQZK2NrpSNxzqGkIQ1+/DgxVAXxz67hifyiDugBnBg5tE umZeobwC2dh4fDxUC0nqcPJT1a/a1ANO7mMz72n3EQkYuKySJweQiBJHCUaYqXmJSxxa a56DXdHDYX18UPY0PjKF3J4qr0fep266mtFwUoN7wakZQAygCZbUYpfRDlI8SqKYC/mQ eNImCQJlTcvOwbzGjSneLqsUDWeKT0cyIjl1BZaW6zNQ51RZD49CILHmPvYlKvysrv6b QGMQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=bzUVkbk/vcl/k73yTpJPb8tDXnvCniu7RfbUjOIPjEU=; b=k+o/ApLnu4YtAiKjleLWuzWXKYbJI+9bQ2tNuGMhOdfa0AMNjFAvAh9nvuiHl/S3bR tEYVp/Ogl0KzAq41szlLByExUk0aXuxl7Lx4Nlyly/AuUTzNEzgzjhr4OOXGqAgcscu9 wh/IXx7YqbJMYUc49jMhkVF8KrHjHbQ/uyzLMqIWMvzUyPP+kIWGM1QzbmdsuxtRCZsc 74XCCBYv4PuNzyvuZFL/Uky4D4qgLze19CAn+YJaj2eq1641dS3xKunJuqku6KBlL59z 3wsem/rSTelkUOusKeLuEJGc6RK2IEqVrrLjq4YlVSMVfuaNsRkosGrwfSmG6nqcPDl9 c3Bg== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXKAlupIGcF1viAvBGYD9OiEe2nf6vOnG3Ufn7H4IqZlAYwlF6IIXau9vaYCeSbDTA44grf4EDNQ4pxVaw== X-Received: by 10.55.198.149 with SMTP id s21mr18340954qkl.196.1482524277052; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 12:17:57 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.152.197 with HTTP; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 12:17:56 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <1482522285.920219937@mobile.rackspace.com> References: <1482522285.920219937@mobile.rackspace.com> From: Dave Taht Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2016 12:17:56 -0800 Message-ID: To: "dpreed@reed.com" Cc: Marc Petit-Huguenin , "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] Fwd: License File for Open Source Repositories X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2016 20:17:57 -0000 On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 11:44 AM, wrote: > My understanding is that it is already settled case law that contributed = code to a GPL licensed projects implicitly grants a perpetual, royalty free= license to use any applicable patent the author uses in the code. According to this it is not settled case law in the UK. Apache, on the other hand... http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Patent_clauses_in_software_licences#Apache_License= _2.0 > Of course there is no case law regarding patent s in other licenses, in p= articular MIT and BSD, which have no strong copyleft provisions. Yes, I think *mandating* that ietf contributions be under a weak, unsettled license is fraught with problems. > > This issue of submarine patent traps is important in communications proto= col invention. Protocol patents are far worse than software patents... IMO,= communications protocols should never be property. IESG is struggling to c= reate a middle ground, where there should be no middle, IMO. Tend to agree. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: "Marc Petit-Huguenin" > Sent: Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 2:23 pm > To: "Dave Taht" , "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.n= et" > Cc: "Dave Taht" , "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.n= et" > Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] Fwd: License File for Open Source Repositori= es > > On 12/23/2016 08:05 AM, Dave Taht wrote: >> I have no idea what they are trying to do. > > This is to prevent people to propose text to be included in a specificati= on without disclosing that this may be relevant to a patent or patent appli= cation they own or know about. As soon you make a contribution, you are su= pposed to disclose such IPR in the IETF database. This text makes it expli= cit that anything done in such repository is covered by the same requiremen= ts. > > An alternative would have been a variant of the Signed-off-by header, but= as the repository does not extend to the RFC-editor or the IETF Trust, tha= t's, the best that can be done for now. > >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: IESG Secretary >> Date: Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 7:36 AM >> Subject: License File for Open Source Repositories >> To: IETF Announcement List >> Cc: iesg@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org >> >> >> The IESG has observed that many working groups work with open source >> repositories even for their work on specifications. That's great, and >> we're happy to see this development, as it fits well the working style >> of at least some of our working groups. This style is also likely to be >> more popular in the future. >> >> As always, we'd like to understand areas where we can either be helpful >> in bringing in some new things such as tooling, or where we need to >> integrate better between the repository world and the IETF process. As >> an example of the latter, we're wondering whether it would be helpful to >> have a standard boilerplate for these repositories with respect to the >> usual copyright and other matters. The intent is for such text to be >> placed in a suitable file (e.g., "CONTRIBUTING"), probably along with >> some additional information that is already present in these files in >> many repositories. The idea is that people should treat, e.g., text >> contributions to a draft-foo.xml in a repository much in the same way as >> they treat text contributions on the list, at least when it comes to >> copyright, IPR, and other similar issues. >> >> We have worked together with the IETF legal team and few key experts >> from the IETF who are actively using these repositories, and suggest the >> following text. >> >> We're looking to make a decision on this matter on our January 19th, >> 2017 IESG Telechat, and would appreciate feedback before then. This >> message will be resent after the holiday period is over to make sure it >> is noticed. Please send comments to the IESG (iesg@ietf.org) by 2017-01-= 17. >> >> The IESG >> >> =C3=A2=E2=82=AC=E2=80=9D=C3=A2=E2=82=AC=E2=80=9D >> >> This repository relates to activities in the Internet Engineering Task >> Force(IETF). All material in this repository is considered Contributions >> to the IETF Standards Process, as defined in the intellectual property >> policies of IETF currently designated as BCP 78 >> (https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp78), BCP 79 >> (https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp79) and the IETF Trust Legal >> Provisions (TLP) Relating to IETF Documents >> (http://trustee.ietf.org/trust-legal-provisions.html). >> >> Any edit, commit, pull-request, comment or other change made to this >> repository constitutes Contributions to the IETF Standards Process. You >> agree to comply with all applicable IETF policies and procedures, >> including, BCP 78, 79, the TLP, and the TLP rules regarding code >> components (e.g. being subject to a Simplified BSD License) in >> Contributions. >> >> >> > > > -- > Marc Petit-Huguenin > Email: marc@petit-huguenin.org > Blog: https://marc.petit-huguenin.org > Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/petithug > > _______________________________________________ > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel > > --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software! http://blog.cerowrt.org