[CRISP-TEAM] Possible inconsinstency pointed out on IRP for Section III A2 and IIIA3

[Izumi Okutani]

I think there is an agreement the text needs to be improved for
consistency on IPR.

Thank you Andrei for categorizing each elements and Alan for pointing
out specific inconnsistencies. Very helpful.


Paul/Nurani, I wonder if you could help revise text to reflect the
points below for IIIA3ix?

We can ask others to help if needed but I feel it may be better for you
to control the overall text on this part.

To Alan's point -

>>> I think we would like some IPR to be vested in neutral organisations,
>>> and some IPR to be in the public domain.  Section III.A.3.ix seems to me
>>> to be talking about the part that should be in the puiblic domain
>>> (almosst everything except the trademank and domain name), but it could
>>> be worded more clearly.

Agree.

>>> Also, III.A.3.ix talks about "public domain or the RIRs", while III.A.2
>>> does not have "or the RIRs".  They should be consistent.
>>>
>>> Where did "or the RIRs" come from?  I seem to recall discussions about
>>> the public domain.

I also don't recall our consensus on RIRs either.
My understanding is the same as Alan's.

Let's confirm at the call today but feedback on the ML beforehand is
welcome.

On 2015/01/14 1:55, Paul Rendek wrote:
> Yes, I agree. Well spotted Alan and thanks Andrei for actually listing
> these. It makes it much clearer.
> 
> Cheers,
> Paul
> 
> 
> On 1/13/15 4:32 PM, Andrei Robachevsky wrote:
>> Agree.
>>
>> I think confusion comes from the fact that we are talking about 3
>> differrent things and perhaps do not articulating this sufficiently:
>>
>> - IANA trademark and IANA.ORG domain  -> IETF Trust
>> - public number resource registries -> public domain
>> - Any future intellectual property rights -> public domain or RIRs
>>
>> Regarding the third one, I think it depends on the nature of the IPRs,
>> we may as well include the IETF Trust as a potential destination.
>>
>> Andrei
>>
>> Alan Barrett wrote on 13/01/15 17:07:
>>> On Wed, 14 Jan 2015, Izumi Okutani wrote:
>>>> These is a highlighting the texts related to IRP where confirmation
>>>> about possible inconsistency expressed on the IANAXFER list.
>>>>
>>>> Do any of you think we need to improve any part of the text to make it
>>>> sound less inconsistent?
>>> Yes, I think we could improve the text.
>>>
>>> I think we would like some IPR to be vested in neutral organisations,
>>> and some IPR to be in the public domain.  Section III.A.3.ix seems to me
>>> to be talking about the part that should be in the puiblic domain
>>> (almosst everything except the trademank and domain name), but it could
>>> be worded more clearly.
>>>
>>> Also, III.A.3.ix talks about "public domain or the RIRs", while III.A.2
>>> does not have "or the RIRs".  They should be consistent.
>>>
>>> Where did "or the RIRs" come from?  I seem to recall discussions about
>>> the public domain.
>>>
>>> --apb (Alan Barrett)
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CRISP mailing list
>>> CRISP at nro.net
>>> https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/crisp
>> _______________________________________________
>> CRISP mailing list
>> CRISP at nro.net
>> https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/crisp
>>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CRISP mailing list
> CRISP at nro.net
> https://www.nro.net/mailman/listinfo/crisp
>