Minutes from IPR WG at the 68th IETF

Date: MONDAY, March 19, 2007
Time: 1300-1500 Afternoon Session I
Place: Prague

I - agenda bashing: no changes

II - outgoing rights draft
   anyone wish to raise issues before going to IESG
   Simon (on Jabber) - I sent in a review
   Harald: who thinks its ready for iesg - no response
   Brian - ok but should be reviewed on mailing list
   no objections in the room to send to IESG but Harald will take
	question to list

III - matching issues to resolutions
   Harald reviewed issues from issues list and the resolutions
	1166 Quotations from RFCs and I-Ds
		Resolution: Permitted
	1167 Excerpt labeling
		Resolution: SHOULD label, format as appropriate
	1168 non-code excerpts
		Resolution: Permitted
	1169 Modified excerpts
		Resolution: Permitted for code, not permitted for non-code
	1175 How can code be distinguished from non-code?
		Resolution: List of types of content + a marker mechanism – Trust maintains
	1199 What license should the IETF grant to third parties on Contributions?
		Resolution: Unmodified excerpts for non-code, excerpt & modify for code
	1212 Copyright statements in I-Ds and RFCs: Meaning?
		Resolution: Basically meaningless in I-Ds, relevant for RFCs
	1237 Should incoming rights be published as 3978 delta or replacement?
		Resolution: Replacement
	1238 Should secretariat ask for IPR clarification from IPR holder on 3rd party IPR
		disclosures
		Resolution: Yes. draft-narten-ipr-3979-3rd-party-fix approved in January.
	1239 Understanding intent of participants
		Resolution: None needed.
	1400 Permission to modify code: Unlimited or restrictable
		Resolution: Unlimited
	no argument that these issues should be closed
   Harald reviewed issues that have not been resolved
	1246 Incoming rights: How much should be said about outgoing rights?
		Not resolved, punted to next agenda item
	1273 How do we usefully define "excerpt"?
		San Diego: Somebody else’s problem (closed)
	1282 Should multiple copyright statements be permitted in I-Ds and RFCs?
		Suggestion: none needed for I-D, RFC Editor matter for RFCs
		Need the ability to do “joint” for joint publication. Need to avoid lots of
		conflicting ones.
	1337 Notices and Rights Required in RFC Editor Contributions
		Proposal: RFC Editor’s problem (+IAB) – not the WG’s issue.
	1338 Notices "normally placed at the end“ (raised in conjunction with nits checker)
		Word “normally” was chosen to be non-nonrmative. Don’t check.
	1339 Does RFC 3978 3.3.a.(E) grant third parties rights to modify source
		Jorge believes that license permits extraction & bugfixing.

	close - what is an excerpt
	multiple copyrights statements in ID - may need for other SDO
		document
	rfc ed specific text in incoming doc - consensus: should
		be removed
	others as on slide

IV - incoming draft
   add phrase that says what is normative and what is not
	boilerplate - should it be there?
	Scott Bradner - yes
	Brian Carpenter - changes are painful but 1st set of
		boilerplate important
	Scott Bradner - do not need most of boilerplate - need
		1st pp & exp date
	Harald - conclusion: short boilerplate - with trust ok to change
	John Klensin - should be in RFC and unchangeable or just
		a pointer
	Scott Bradner - how about pointer with text that says
		text for start of ID that summaries responsibilities
 		of authors in light of bcp 79
	Harald - how many support pointing to doc maintained by trust?
			consensus in favor
   Harald -incoming doc structure:
	abstract
	defs
	intro & descriptions
	legal stuff

   John Klensin - need to have incoming stable before last calling outgoing
   Harald - do WGLC on outgoing but say that doc will not go to
	IESG until incoming done to cover what -outgoing needs
   Ted Hardie (via Jabber) - not do IETF Last Call until incoming
	document finished working group last call

meeting concluded