Subject: Re: [tlp-interest] Request to designate TLP Section 6 as Code Components

From: "John R Levine" <[email-masked]>
Date: 6 Nov 2009 21:34:31 -0500

>Yes, xml2rfc needs to be able to produce the boilerplate.  However, I
>still do not see it as code.  It is text that happens to be some
>constant strings in composition tools and templates to assist
>authors.  The TLP tells authors to include the boilerplate.  I agree
>with Joel's conclusion: it does not need to be designated as code for
>any author support tool to use it.

Your answer is quite reasonable, but in view of the trust's apparent
position that a single line of ABNF triggers the requirement that an
RFC pull in the BSD license, a reasonable claim that something isn't
code doesn't make it reassuring.

R's,
John

---

From: "John R Levine" <[email-masked]>
Date: 6 Nov 2009 21:35:14 -0500

>Now, if some other standards body needs those exact words (copyright
>applies only to exact words), ...

People have lost some very expensive lawsuits over that misconception.

This whole process might be a lot simpler if the IETF or trust
disclaimed any interest of trivialities rather than trying to lock
things down.

R's,
John