"Simon Josefsson" <jas@extundo.com> wrote in message [🔎] iluhdaam1hc.fsf@latte.josefsson.org">news:[🔎] iluhdaam1hc.fsf@latte.josefsson.org...
Hi all. I have discussed an issue with IETF's copying conditions on debian-devel before, and got several supporters. My effort to change the copying conditions in IETF has resulted in an updated version of my proposed legal license, and I want to check with this community whether this proposed license would be acceptable to the Debian community. I have made changes to it recently, and want your input. My goal is to propose a license that would be acceptable to the Debian community and the FreeBSD community, but also be acceptable to the IETF.
Ok. s/specifically imply/specifically implies/ s/Internet Standard/an Internet Standard/I would also personally change the important sentance to this (changes marked by *'s):
This specifically *implies* that *a modified version*must *not claim endorsement of the modified version* by the IETF, IESG, IANA, IAB, ISOC, RFC Editor, *or any* similar *organization* and remove any claims of status as
*an* Internet Standard, e.g., by removing the RFC boilerplate.Iwould also rethink the use of e.g. which most closely means 'that is'. It indicates a restatement
rather than an example.I think it is accecptable to allow the modified versions to say something like the following, which the original
appears to disallow."This document is based on the IETF Internet Standard RFCXXXX, although this version is not offical."