Message-Id: <6.2.1.2.2.20050716095906.04863eb0@mail.afrac.org>
Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2005 18:27:29 +0200
To: "Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>
From: r&d afrac <rd@afrac.org>
Subject: Re: [Ltru] [psg.com #1073] Last call: IANA adaptation of the
	UN disclaimer
In-Reply-To: <002001c589ad$547db840$7f1afea9@oemcomputer>
References: <OFB0140EA9.E38047C8-ON8825703F.007D62A9-8825703F.007E3E13@spe.sony.com>
	<6.2.1.2.2.20050716021707.0544ed60@mail.afrac.org>
	<002001c589ad$547db840$7f1afea9@oemcomputer>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: LTRU Working Group <ltru@ietf.org>
Precedence: list
Sender: ltru-bounces@lists.ietf.org
Errors-To: ltru-bounces@lists.ietf.org

Dear Randy,
Half reading or constantly misconstruing what I say helps me a lot with 
reviewers.

On 04:23 16/07/2005, Randy Presuhn said:
> > The IETF system makes that in the WG you cannot remove text, just add text.
>False.  There have been proposals to delete specific text, and some have
>been adopted by this WG.

"A is not possible"/"Yes AB is possible" is usefull for me with legal 
reviewers.

> > Since I cannot remove the whole text, I just keep proposing correct things.
> > When they oppose they build a good case to refuse the whole thing
> > afterward. I am sorry for that, but there is no other way foreseen by the
> > Internet standard process to kill a detrimental proposition.
>
>False.  For example, a WG can request that an item be removed from its 
>charter.
>This has happened in the past.

"AB is not possible"/"Yes B is possible" is good too.
All the more than you take as an example my ignorance of a procedure I 
proposed (you ... oppose) in the next mail.

> > There is a disclaimer to be made. No one expect it to be perfect (see next
> > comment). My target was just to illustrate the doctrine of this WG.  This
> > WG documents an absolute Registry (the Registries quoted by Randy are
> > absolute: they create their codes). Randy, Peter and you show that you do
> > not care about the copyrights of ISO and UN. As if you were removing the
> > copyright mentions when you paste an Open Source piece of code.
>
>False.  If we were imitating the structure of the ISO or UN directories, such
>a claim might almost be plausible.  With a differing organization of data,
>the omission of some elements, the addition of other elements,
>and a differing scope of application, any claim of copyright infringement
>would be rather far-fetched.

Thank you for so exactly describing your intent to tamper with the intended 
usage of the codes.

>If you have experts in IPR law who would like to opine on this topic, 
>please forward the mailing list address to them.

I described many times my policy and my reasons. Each thing in its time, 
and budget.

> > >I think that IANA/ICANN is the one to draft the text and perhaps it should
> > >be in the context of all registries managed by the organization.
> >
> > Do not worry: this is exactly what will happen. The Registry will be
> > published by the new IANA director (Doug Barton is quitting) under legal
> > responsibility of ICANN and ISOC (IASA). So, there is a long, long legal
> > debate ahead. This particular response about the UN disclaimer will
> > probably be an important point for the lawyers of IANA, ISOC and ISO.
>
>Out of scope.
>This (if it exists) is not our problem solve.

Thank you for acknowledging this. You just saved hours of legal demonstration.
jfc


_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru