Subject: Debian "desert island"

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 13:56:51 -0500

> Debian uses a thought experiment to decide whether a license would
> qualify as free, called the "desert island test", here is a short
> explanation:
> 
>   Imagine a castaway on a desert island with a solar-powered computer
>   with a internet connection that can't upload. This would make it
>   impossible to fulfill any requirement to make changes publicly
>   available or to send patches to some particular place. This holds
>   even if such requirements are only upon request, as the castaway
>   might be able to receive messages but be unable to send them. To be
>   Free, software must be modifiable by this unfortunate castaway, who
>   must also be able to legally share modifications with friends on the
>   island.

Oh dear ... this is headed into the "fair use" legal quagmire in copyright
law, as while it depends on the details, use of the modifications on the
island may be "fair use", which is automatically allowed by copyright law
no matter what the conditions, restriction, grant, license, etc. says.
Unfortunately, the precise boundaries of "fair use" can be charitably
described as vague.

I guess the right assumption is that the unfortunate castaway is unable
to make legal determinations of what is vs. is not "fair use" (which is
actually the case for most of us non-castaways ;-) ), and hence needs
clear assurance that whatever the castaway and friends do to/with the
free software will not be deemed illegal after they are rescued and will
not require additional action after the rescue to be rendered legal (e.g.,
will not require legal determination of whether it was "fair use").

I apologize for this potential tangent, but Simon mentioned education
as an example to be dealt with, and "fair use" rights are of great
importance for education.

Thanks,
--David
----------------------------------------------------
David L. Black, Senior Technologist
EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
+1 (508) 293-7953             FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786
[email-masked]        Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
----------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Ipr-wg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg

---

From: Simon Josefsson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 20:16:52 +0100

> Unfortunately, the precise boundaries of "fair use" can be charitably

Right.  I don't think we should have to resort to "fair use"
permissions when including RFC material in free software.  I want the
license to be clear here, I believe it should explicitly make sure the
rights granted are compatible with those required by the free software
community.

> will not require legal determination of whether it was "fair use").

If the IETF license is clear on this, the castaway doesn't need to
rely on the "fair use" principle.

> importance for education.

I'm not an expert on copyright law, but I think there are cases where
"fair use" would not be sufficient for education uses.

In any case, again, I don't think we should have to invoke the "fair
use" principle at all.  Do you think doing that is necessary?

Thanks,
Simon

---

From: Matthew Garrett <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 19:36:17 +0000

> rights granted are compatible with those required by the free software

Fair use isn't universal. In the UK, fair use is pretty much limited to 
timeshifting TV, review purposes and photocopying of small quantities of 
books for research purposes. So relying on fair use causes practical 
problems in any case.

-- 
Matthew Garrett | [email-masked]

---

From: "todd glassey" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 15:27:52 -0800

Fair Use can be made universal though by creating a contract between the
submitter/rights owner, and the IETF wherein it specifically sets up fair
use for that individuals obtaining the benefit of the IETF's publication
process.

T.

---

From: Simon Josefsson <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 11:06:54 +0100

Agreed, although I believe it would be useful to use the term "Fair
Use" if we are implying certain permissions not implied by the
standard definition of "fair use" as defined in copyright laws.

To try and draw a conclusion from this thread, it seems that whatever
the license we end up with, we should not have to rely on copyright
law's interpretation of "fair use" as it is not clear enough.

Thanks,
Simon

---

From: Simon Josefsson <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 12:01:11 +0100

> standard definition of "fair use" as defined in copyright laws.

Sorry, that should be "I DO NOT believe it would be useful...".

---

From: "todd glassey" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 09:37:28 -0800

The proposal then should perhaps identify and address the specific end uses
and what they require to be defendable IP transferences. At least from that
point you can start to codify the rights and the process for getting them in
the first place.

Todd

---

From: "Simon Josefsson" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 19:58:08 +0100 (CET)

> The proposal then should perhaps identify and address the specific end
> uses and what they require to be defendable IP transferences. At least
> from that point you can start to codify the rights and the process for
> getting them in the first place.

I believe that is what my document does.  It includes examples that I
believe should be permitted, and propose an outbound rights from the IETF
that would solve the problem.

I think the WG has to decide whether it want to solve this problem or not,
by updating the charter.  We likely won't get input from everyone
otherwise.

Thanks,
Simon

>> >>> timeshifting TV, review purposes and photocopying of small
>> quantities
> of

---

From: "todd glassey" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 13:00:41 -0800

How about this - how about modeling the entire induction and release
process. That seems to be the issue here. I made up some WF's of what I
think it should look like - send me a note offline and I will send them to
anyone that wants to see them.

I am working on the legal issues of the differences between Gifting and a
Release against a Copyright or the extensions of that in the forms of
Industrial Design Rights as well. Should have the draft ready this
evening...

T.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Simon Josefsson" <[email-masked]>
To: "todd glassey" <[email-masked]>
Cc: "todd glassey" <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>;
<[email-masked]>
Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2005 10:58 AM
Subject: Re: Debian "desert island"

> >> >>> > license to be clear here, I believe it should explicitly make
sure
> > the
> >> >>> Fair use isn't universal. In the UK, fair use is pretty much
limited
> > to