#1273 How do we usefully define "excerpt"?

Simon Josefsson wrote:
>   
>>> John Klensin has raised another concern:
>>>
>>> "I'm prepared to lose this one,
although, if I do, I'm going to
>>> press strongly for copyright transfers to the
IETF so the policy
>>> can be administered ("why that is
relevant" is probably a
>>> different thread, but hinges on when an excerpt
isn't "just" an
>>> excerpt)."
>>>       
>> I'm not sure. If we get the right to allow
derivative works by 3rd parties,
>> why would we need this?
>>     
>
> Good question, I don't see why.
>
> In general, I think that Copyright transfers may be a
good idea
> anyway.  It would, e.g., enable the IETF to defend
copyright
> infringement on RFCs.  OTOH, the IETF might prefer to
avoid wasting
> time in court though.
>   
As Todd Glassey is fond of pointing out, copyright transfers
are usually 
done via mechanisms that have relatively high transaction
costs - both 
in terms of number of steps required and in the number of
signoffs one 
usually has to get before jumping through those hoops.

How much more expensive can we usefully make the process?

> /Simon
>
>   


_______________________________________________
Ipr-wg mailing list
Ipr-wgietf.org
https:/
/www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg

--On Thursday, 27 April, 2006 16:07 +0200 Harald Alvestrand
<haraldalvestrand.no> wrote:

> As Todd Glassey is fond of pointing out, copyright
transfers
> are usually done via mechanisms that have relatively
high
> transaction costs - both in terms of number of steps
required
> and in the number of signoffs one usually has to get
before
> jumping through those hoops.
> 
> How much more expensive can we usefully make the
process?

As compared to the cost of trying to precisely define
exactly
what types of excerpts are permitted, of exactly what sorts
of
modifications are and are not permitted in them, and how
they
are identified.... and going through this process again in a
year when we discover that we have gotten it wrong, I
suggest
that the pain of copyright transfers --done on an "any
rights I
have, I transfer and I believe there are no rights in this
[compiled] work I haven't accounted for"  basis-- is
_much_
lower.  

Minimization of overall costs --including the costs to the
community of regularly repeating the types of attempted
hair-splitting we have seen here and the costs of worrying
about
what to do about RFCs published before a long list of flag
days
-- is exactly why I'm suggesting that, if we need these
other
rights including the right to permit semi-arbitrary
third-party
uses, we should pack it in and insist on copyright transfers
as
the low-cost option.

    john


_______________________________________________
Ipr-wg mailing list
Ipr-wgietf.org
https:/
/www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg