Re: Proposed license for IETF Contributions
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Proposed license for IETF Contributions
- From: Simon Josefsson <email@example.com>
- Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2005 18:09:54 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] firstname.lastname@example.org>
- In-reply-to: <email@example.com> (Francesco Poli's message of "Tue, 22 Nov 2005 00:28:04 +0100")
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com>
Francesco Poli <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 22:19:08 +0100 Simon Josefsson wrote:
>> Francesco Poli <email@example.com> writes:
>> > On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 00:14:14 +0100 Simon Josefsson wrote:
>> >> Nathanael Nerode <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>> > [...]
>> >> > I'm not sure about my suggested "name of work" phrase; it's
>> >clunky, > > anyone got anything better?
>> >> I agree it sounds strange, but I can't think of a better term.
>> > Maybe "title"?
>> > But if you think that "title" is too bound to documents and doesn't
>> > fit well for works of authorship in the general case, I won't be
>> > able to disagree much...
>> "Title" will be confused with the actual document title, which has
>> nothing to do with this. Label? I dunno.
> I thought the "actual document title" was the "name of the work"...
> Now I'm puzzled: could you please clarify?
Examples are good for this:
Actual document title may be:
Enhancing TCP Over Satellite Channels using Standard Mechanisms.
The "name of work" or "label" or what we may call it, may be:
RFC 2488, BCP 0028
These labels are not protected by trademark or copyright, as far as I
believe, but in copying conditions, it can be requested to remove them
anyway, since labeling another work as RFC 2488 would be confusing.
This does not prevent anyone from writing a completely new document
and calling it RFC 2488 though. Copying conditions can't help with
> P.S.: Please don't reply to me Cc:ing the list, as I didn't ask it.
> Reply to the list only, instead, I'd rather avoid receiving replies
> twice. Thanks.
Cc:ing the author is normal procedures, you should consider using a
header like Mail-Followup-To to avoid copies.