[discuss] On the technical side

John Curran jcurran at istaff.org
Sun Mar 16 19:17:01 UTC 2014

On Mar 16, 2014, at 3:01 PM, Jefsey <jefsey at jefsey.com> wrote:

> At 17:09 16/03/2014, John Curran wrote:
>> On Mar 16, 2014, at 11:37 AM, Jefsey <jefsey at jefsey.com> wrote:
>>> http://trustee.ietf.org/docs/IETF-Copyright-FAQ.pdf
>>> These issues are probably to be better studied when refering to the IANA issue. The USG cannot delegate what is owned by ISOC.
>>   Could you be a little clearer? 
> These FAQ are an easy reminder of the legal issues concerning the ownership of the Internet technology.  

Yes, a wonderful reminder...  irrelevant from what I can tell, but a wonderful reminder.

>> Do you believe that the NTIA must maintain its present   IANA functions contract as a result of the above reference?  
> IANA is an ICANN trade mark ( http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4805:e1703w.2.6 ).

Yes, I am aware of such, but you did not answer the question "Do you believe that the NTIA 
must maintain its present  IANA functions contract as a result of the above reference?"

> NTIA relinquishes something it does not own and will continue to control. What about Verisign.

NTIA has been using the term "IANA" for many years, and it's solicitation and acceptance
of a plan to transition its administrative oversight role doesn't imply anything about control;
in fact, most would argue it would represent a form of relinquishing of control.

>> To the extent that ISOC and the IETF are "global customers and partners of the IANA services", and any transition plan proposed meets their needs and expectations (a requirement stated by NTIA), why would the above reference document pose any issue?
> Rights on the Internet are owned by the IETF Trust (nothing to do with IANA, ICANN or the NTIA). This Trust can be modified and have successors. It only grants right to modify or make derivative work outside of the IETF on a case per case basis.

So, you still have not expressed how your believe the IETF Copyright fact would interfere
with the NTIA's announced intention.   The best I can discern is you are asserting an issue
based on a scenario where ISOC, IAB, and IESG all agree on a proposed transition is in
the IETF's interest but the IETF Trust would force the NTIA to instead continue the IANA
Function contract?  Care to explain the actual concern that you foresee a little more clearly?


Disclaimer: My views alone.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140316/7d9e79fe/attachment.html>

More information about the discuss mailing list