[Iana-ipr] Draft IETF Trust Documents
alan.barrett at afrinic.net
Sun Jul 17 08:15:28 CEST 2016
Thanks for following up on this.
> On 17 Jul 2016, at 09:51, Ray Pelletier <rpelletier at isoc.org> wrote:
>>> The Trust preference is one Community Agreement executed
>>> by all the communities. And it would be best it seems to me if
>>> all were commenting on these docs at the same time, rather
>>> than in separately in parallel, or serially.
> What I was suggesting was that we include on one list the
> representatives from the RIR, IETF, and Names communities
> to review the Community Agreement and License documents.
I agree that that we should all comment in parallel, and I think that we have already agreed on a single community agreement.
I suggest that the existing iana-ipr list is an appropriate venue; it’s already readable by the public (both via the archive at <https://www.nro.net/pipermail/iana-ipr/> and via the possibility of read-only subscription.
We can easily add more subscribers with posting rights. As I said in June, I think that lawyers from all communities should be subscribed. It’s probably also time to get more participation from ICANN.
> As for a timeline, based on an assumption that the documents
> should be ready to execute on 30 September, the Trust was
> working from this timeline:
> 7 July Negotiation commences with all parties
> 8 August Trust agreements reached with all parties
> All Agreements published for community comments
> for 30 days (At a minimum for IETF community)
> 12 September Community Comments Period Ends
> IETF community recommends modifications/no changes
> Other communities recommend modifications/no changes
> Trust considers recommendations and makes changes/no changes
> Trust publishes response to comments and republishes
> 30 September Execution of all Trust Agreements
> Trust with ICANN - IPR Transfer
> Trust with PTI - License trademarks and domain use
> Trust with Operating Communities (RIRs, Names, IETF)
> Does that Timeline make sense?
Yes, I think that makes sense, although I am not clear on whether licences should be granted to PTI, or to ICANN with the ability to sub-license. That may differ from one community to another.
> As to making the documents “public” at this time. We had thought that
> working through the details with the Community Reps and reaching
> acceptability among us, then going “public” in our respective communities
> for feedback, then getting the reps back together to discuss the docs would
> work for a process.
> Does that process make sense?
Technically, the documents are already available to the public, via the archives of the iana-ipr list. However, they have not been explicitly drawn to the attention of any of the operational communities.
Personally, I am fine with starting the formal public comment period after there is internal agreement within the iana-ipr group.
More information about the Iana-ipr