Re: Packages containing RFCs
Francesco Poli <email@example.com> writes:
> On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 11:32:30 +0200 Simon Josefsson wrote:
>> Hi all!
>> I just noticed that heimdal-docs contained copies of RFCs, which I
>> believe are licensed under a non-free license, so I filed bug #364860.
> Good, I tagged your bug nonfree-doc rfc as user
> firstname.lastname@example.org, as kindly requested on
Thanks! I didn't know about that...
>> Some additional filtering should probably be done, some earlier RFC
>> are (I believe) in the public domain.
> Public domain RFCs (if there are any) can be identified by looking at
> They must carry an appropriate notice to state that they are public
> domain or else be knowingly published with no copyright notice in a
> jurisdiction where, and at a time when, no copyright notice used to mean
> public domain.
> Better be sure that something is public domain, before saying that
> everything is fine, IMHO.
>  IIRC, the United Stated used to be such a jurisdiction until they
> signed the Berne Convention (in 1988); I don't know for other
Right, and a lot of the early RFCs fall into that category, like the
first 1000 RFCs or so.
Some other RFCs, such as RFC 3492 and RFC 4027, are explicitly
released under a permissive license, so they can be kept too.