Re: Effort to change IETF's copying conditions for RFCs
Russ Allbery <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Wesley J Landaker <email@example.com> writes:
>> On Thursday 06 October 2005 06:57, Simon Josefsson wrote:
>>> I know the copying conditions of IETF RFC's has been a concern for
>>> Debian in the past, and that the RFCs has been removed from the
>>> official archive (?),
> If they haven't been yet, they will have to be for etch, at least all of
> the RFCs that are under the standard IETF IPR policy. They don't allow
> modification and redistribution of modified versions, and therefore do not
> meet DFSG#3.
Yes. I couldn't find them when I did a 'apt-cache search' so I assume
they were gone. I recall a series of packages, rfc1-499, rfc500-999
or similar before.
>>> so I thought this would be of some interest to you. I am trying to
>>> influence the IETF to change the copying conditions on RFCs to make
>>> them more free software friendly.
>> This would be great to get this clarified, as I believe the RFCs were
>> always intended to be available for unlimited distribution. I totally
>> support lobbying to get the the IETF to make it clear. =)
> Unlimited distribution isn't the problem. Modification and redistribution
> of modified versions is the problem, and that restriction was apparently
> intentional. So unfortunately, it's more than just a matter of getting
> the IETF to be clearer.
Getting them to be clearer is the first step. Right now, I don't
think BCP78 even say what the IETF intend it to say. Perhaps we can
convince them of the utility of permitting redistribution of modified