Internet DRAFT - draft-thomson-gendispatch-rfc-derivatives
draft-thomson-gendispatch-rfc-derivatives
General Area Dispatch M. Thomson
Internet-Draft Mozilla
Updates: 5377 (if approved) E. Rescorla
Intended status: Informational Windy Hill Systems, LLC
Expires: 31 March 2024 T. B. Terriberry
Xiph.Org Foundation
28 September 2023
Request to the Trustees of the IETF Trust to Permit the Creation of
Derivative Works
draft-thomson-gendispatch-rfc-derivatives-00
Abstract
The IETF Trust holds rights to RFCs. This document updates RFC 5377
to request that the IETF Trust change its licensing for IETF
documents to permit the creation of derivative works.
About This Document
This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.
The latest revision of this draft can be found at
https://martinthomson.github.io/rfc-derivatives/draft-thomson-
gendispatch-rfc-derivatives.html. Status information for this
document may be found at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-
thomson-gendispatch-rfc-derivatives/.
Discussion of this document takes place on the General Area Dispatch
Working Group mailing list (mailto:gendispatch@ietf.org), which is
archived at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gendispatch/.
Subscribe at https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gendispatch/.
Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at
https://github.com/martinthomson/rfc-derivatives.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Thomson, et al. Expires 31 March 2024 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft RFC Derivative Works September 2023
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."
This Internet-Draft will expire on 31 March 2024.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2023 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components
extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as
described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Rationale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Permitting the Creation of Derivative Works . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1. Recognition of Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2. Withholding of Naming Rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Other Streams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. Older RFCs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1. Introduction
The IETF produces RFCs to further its mission [RFC3935] of improving
the Internet. Intellectual property rights for these documents are
held by the IETF Trust [BCP101].
Previous advice to the IETF Trust [ADVICE] was that usage rights for
IETF documents be limited to copying and translations. This can have
the effect of granting the IETF monopoly rights over the maintenance
of work that is published in IETF documents.
Thomson, et al. Expires 31 March 2024 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft RFC Derivative Works September 2023
This document revises the advice to the IETF Trust given in RFC 5377
to expand the rights granted in relation to IETF documents to include
the ability to create derivative works.
The IETF Trust, by way of its Trustees, has indicated that it will
respect the wishes of the IETF in regard to the rights it will grant
in relation to RFCs. It is therefore the IETF's responsibility to
articulate those wishes.
2. Rationale
The mission of the IETF [RFC3935] is to make the Internet better.
This is primarily achieved by producing documents, RFCs, that define
interoperable Internet protocols. The IETF also publishes RFCs that
further this mission in other ways, including Best Current Practice
(BCP), Informational, and Experimental documents.
Over time, the IETF has published documents on a very wide range of
topics. The quality of IETF publications depends on the ability for
the IETF to find a sufficient number of participants with expertise
in the topic area.
The IETF has an excellent reputation as a venue for the
standardization of Internet protocols. The protocols and documents
produced by the IETF are well respected. The IETF enjoys strong
ongoing support and so appears to be a good choice of venue for
standardization in the areas in which the community has strong
expertise.
Should the IETF be unable to attract adequate depth of expertise to
produce a revision of existing work, another organization might have
that expertise. In the most extreme case, the IETF could fail
entirely or cease to be a viable venue for standardization, making it
necessary to produce revisions in another venue. Licensing that
permits the creation of derivative works could allow another
organization to perform necessary maintenance or revisions.
The licensing terms generated in response to RFC 5377 [ADVICE] do not
permit the creation of derivative works. This could unduly give the
IETF an monopoly over the maintenance of protocols that are published
as IETF documents.
Thomson, et al. Expires 31 March 2024 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft RFC Derivative Works September 2023
While contributors are able to provide a license for this purpose,
that depends on securing permission from all contributors. The
collaborative nature of IETF work makes it difficult to obtain this
sort of license. In many cases it may not even be practical to
determine all the contributors and contact them. The IETF Trust is
in a position to make more permissive terms more readily available
for all new documents.
Similar considerations apply to other document streams: IAB, IRTF, or
independent submissions [RFC4844]; however, see Section 4.
3. Permitting the Creation of Derivative Works
This document advises the IETF Trust to amend the license for IETF
Documents (RFCs and Internet-Drafts) [LICENSE] to permit the creation
of derivative works.
This is in addition to the rights granted under the existing license
[LICENSE].
3.1. Recognition of Status
The IETF Trust is requested to ensure that any license permitting the
creation of a derivative work stipulates that the original work be
clearly identified. Derivatives also need to clearly attribute
authors and contributors of the original.
3.2. Withholding of Naming Rights
The IETF Trust is advised to make the license to create derivative
works conditional on the use of a distinct protocol name when
creating new versions of existing protocols. This need not apply to
reused or copied protocol elements or fields; it only applies to the
protocol, extension, or component that is being revised.
The IETF Trust should maintain the ability to permit the reuse of a
name in appropriate cases, such as when the IETF agrees to transfer
development of a protocol to a different organization or where the
IETF has decided not to take up a given piece of work and the
proponents bring it elsewhere.
The potential for confusion about the status of a derivative work is
not completely avoidable. However, the requirement to use a new name
for protocols or mechanisms ensures that names are not used to
compound any potential confusion.
Thomson, et al. Expires 31 March 2024 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft RFC Derivative Works September 2023
4. Other Streams
The IETF Trust is also responsible for licensing terms on documents
that are produced in relation to the activity of other RFC streams
(IRTF, IAB, and independent). The IETF cannot advise the IETF Trust
as it relates to licenses on RFCs published in these other streams.
Ideally, other streams would adopt the amended license terms, as they
have done for the existing license [LICENSE]. That would ensure
consistency across the RFC series and for work contributed to other
streams. However, this document cannot serve as advice from other
streams; it can only capture IETF consensus.
5. Older RFCs
As noted in [LICENSE], IETF documents published prior to the
effective date of that license are subject to other licensing
provisions. The IETF Trust is not requested to attempt to secure the
ability to alter the license terms for these documents.
6. Security Considerations
This document is purely procedural in nature and therefore raises no
new concerns that might affect the security of Internet users.
However, ensuring that proper protocol maintenance can be conducted
by qualified and motivated experts could improve security.
7. IANA Considerations
This document has no IANA actions.
8. References
8.1. Normative References
[ADVICE] Halpern, J., Ed., "Advice to the Trustees of the IETF
Trust on Rights to Be Granted in IETF Documents",
RFC 5377, DOI 10.17487/RFC5377, November 2008,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5377>.
[LICENSE] IETF Trust, "Trust Legal Provisions (TLP)", Revision 5.0,
25 March 2015, <https://trustee.ietf.org/documents/trust-
legal-provisions/>.
[RFC3935] Alvestrand, H., "A Mission Statement for the IETF",
BCP 95, RFC 3935, DOI 10.17487/RFC3935, October 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3935>.
Thomson, et al. Expires 31 March 2024 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft RFC Derivative Works September 2023
8.2. Informative References
[BCP101] Haberman, B., Hall, J., and J. Livingood, "Structure of
the IETF Administrative Support Activity, Version 2.0",
BCP 101, RFC 8711, February 2020.
Arkko, J. and T. Hardie, "Update to the Process for
Selection of Trustees for the IETF Trust", BCP 101,
RFC 8714, February 2020.
Klensin, J., Ed., "IETF Administrative Support Activity
2.0: Consolidated Updates to IETF Administrative
Terminology", BCP 101, RFC 8717, February 2020.
[RFC4844] Daigle, L., Ed. and IAB, "The RFC Series and RFC Editor",
RFC 4844, DOI 10.17487/RFC4844, July 2007,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4844>.
Acknowledgments
TODO acknowledge.
Authors' Addresses
Martin Thomson
Mozilla
Australia
Email: mt@lowentropy.net
Eric Rescorla
Windy Hill Systems, LLC
United States of America
Email: ekr@rtfm.com
Timothy B. Terriberry
Xiph.Org Foundation
United States of America
Email: tterribe@xiph.org
Thomson, et al. Expires 31 March 2024 [Page 6]
