[ih] Who owns old RFCs ?

• Subject: [ih] Who owns old RFCs ?
• From: touch at strayalpha.com (Joseph Touch)
• Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 20:49:04 -0700
• In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
• References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]om> <[email protected]>

> On Apr 21, 2020, at 8:36 PM, Brian E Carpenter via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> 
> On 22-Apr-20 14:34, Steve Crocker via Internet-history wrote:
>> FWIW, the ground rule for the earliest RFCs was unlimited distribution.
> 
> Fair enough, and that led to a pioneering open access policy, but
> those don't affect copyright, which I've always assumed for the early
> RFCs belonged to their authors, or - if their conditions of employment
> so stipulated - to their employers.

The changed happened sometime between 1997 and 2000.

> BTW, after a certain time all RFCs said "Distribution of this
> memo|document is unlimited". However, this was not included in
> the early ones, e.g. RFC768/791/792/793 make no such statement.

Unlimited distribution seems like it relaxes only part of a copyright. I.e., rights to derivative works, translations, etc. aren?t the same as ?unlimited distribution? AFAICT.  The latter appears to imply ?in total, unchanged?, again AFAICT.

Joe

• References:
  • [ih] Who owns old RFCs ?
    • From: johnl at iecc.com (John Levine)
  • [ih] Who owns old RFCs ?
    • From: steve at shinkuro.com (Steve Crocker)
  • [ih] Who owns old RFCs ?
    • From: brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com (Brian E Carpenter)

• Prev by Date: [ih] Who owns old RFCs ?
• Next by Date: [ih] Who owns old RFCs ?
• Previous by thread: [ih] Who owns old RFCs ?
• Next by thread: [ih] Who owns old RFCs ?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread