Last Call Review of draft-ietf-httpbis-legally-restricted-status-04
review-ietf-httpbis-legally-restricted-status-04-opsdir-lc-baker-2015-12-22-00

In my lay opinion, being neither a lawyer nor the operator of a web site, this
would appear to be "good to go".

I did have to look up the Lex Julia Majestatis. When I did so, Google included
references to the Lex Iulia Maiestatis, which is a 48 BC law attributed to
Julius Caesar regarding treason. I'm not sure where we come down on the
interchange between J and I in cases like this, but I note the fact. That is
probably an excellent question for the RFC Editor.

As to the operational details, it presumes some sort of database entry
maintained by operator of the indicated web site or accessible as a service by
the site that can determine, for a stated URI, whether there is a legal issue
with the URI. The URI may or may not represent content actually accessible by
via web site; the document clearly states that when the legal block is removed,
the content may still be inaccessible. The detail of the type of block are left
to the referenced site to describe in prose, and so depend on no special coding
in browsers etc beyond the implementation of the code.

Attachment:

signature.asc

Description:

 Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail