A quick and easy question, I'm sure it's been answered before, but
searching didn't turn up anything.

The RSS rights statement says:

-
Copyright © 2000 by the Authors.

Permission to use, copy, modify and distribute the RDF Site Summary
1.0 Specification and its accompanying documentation for any purpose
and without fee is hereby granted in perpetuity, provided that the
above copyright notice and this paragraph appear in all copies. The
copyright holders make no representation about the suitability of the
specification for any purpose. It is provided "as is" without
expressed or implied warranty.

This copyright applies to the RDF Site Summary 1.0 Specification and
accompanying documentation and does not extend to the RSS format itself.
-

...so if I were to create an RSS 1.0 fork and/or modification, I'm
have to display the rights statement and the copyright notice, where
the copyright notice of "the Authors" is (presumably) referring to the
authors of RSS, and not referring to me, even though it would be
posted on the new fork.

Second, what are the licensing implications of a fork? If I create
RSS-FOO 8.1, the rights statement is explicit that it's referring to
RSS 1.0. Can I then license RSS-FOO 8.1 under the LGPL or some such,
or (hypothetically) choose not to license it and sue anyone but me who
uses it? Or is the spirit of the notice that it's a share-alike
statement that all derivatives are bound by (even if that's not what
it says)?

As I said, I'm sure these questions have come up before, but I
couldn't find any answers to them.

Jairus