Subject: [edu-team] Idea: anti-trust education

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2007 11:00:22 +0100

An idea that emerged in some side discussion on IPR issues
is that there may be a need for an anti-trust primer for
WG Chairs (and ADs). I've had elementary anti-trust education
from my employer, and it's certainly useful background.

We'd need help from the IETF counsel if we take up this
idea (e.g. for a future WG Chairs' lunch).

     Brian

_______________________________________________
edu-team mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-team

---

From: Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2007 09:34:29 -0500

Hi Brian,

This seems like a resonable idea, but I think we should start with a  
written anti-trust policy for the IETF...  Other groups I've been  
involved with do have anti-trust policies, so maybe we can borrow  
from one of them as a starting point?

I am not sure that generic education for WG chairs would help, if the  
IETF doesn't have any sort of policy that we're asking them to enforce.

Margaret

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2007 16:15:20 +0100

I think the anti-trust policy is actually already written down,
since RFC 2026, 2418 and the IPR RFCs are the recipe for not
infringing. Apart from not fixing prices, I'm not sure
there is anything else, but of course this is where we need
counsel's advice.

In fact I'd tend to look at it the other way round: start with
an informal education module and upgrade it to formal policy.
Anyway, we can discuss this...

     Brian

On 2007-03-01 15:34, Margaret Wasserman wrote:
> involved with do have anti-trust policies, so maybe we can borrow from 
> one of them as a starting point?
>

---

From: [email-masked] (Scott O. Bradner)
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2007 10:22:59 -0500 (EST)

agree with Brian - the how not to is written down but the why not to
is not & telling people that might be helpful

Scott

---
>From [email-masked]  Thu Mar  1 10:15:10 2007
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2007 16:15:20 +0100
From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Organization: IBM
To: Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [edu-team] Idea: anti-trust education
Cc: EDU Team <[email-masked]>

     Brian

---

From: Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2007 10:27:10 -0500

Hi Brian,

I definitely think that this is worth discussing.

In addition to a "no price fixing" rule, I sometimes heard a few  
other rules -- no planning boycotts comes to mind...

I agree that the rules in RFC 2026 and 2418 are, in part, rules to  
prevent anti-trust, and it would probably be good to make sure that  
WG chairs understand that, so that they won't ignore rules without  
knowing the consequences.  One of the concerns I have in this area is  
how we use design teams...  There are no anti-trust problems if a  
closed design team's output is treated just like individual work, but  
I'm not sure everyone understands why that is important.  Forming a  
design team consisting only of a subset of vendors in a given space  
and then giving their design special weight probably does  
consistitute anti-trust, although IANAL so we'd have to ask counsel  
to know for sure.

Margaret

On Mar 1, 2007, at 10:15 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:

>> This seems like a resonable idea, but I think we should start with  
>> a written anti-trust policy for the IETF...  Other groups I've  
>> been involved with do have anti-trust policies, so maybe we can  
>> borrow from one of them as a starting point?
>> I am not sure that generic education for WG chairs would help, if  
>> the IETF doesn't have any sort of policy that we're asking them to  
>> enforce.
>> Margaret

---

From: "Spencer Dawkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2007 09:36:37 -0600

I pointed out in a private note to Brian that IEEE 802 makes a point
of advising the general population of attendees about antitrust
gotchas. From the most recent 802.1 opening meeting, at
http://www.ieee802.org/1/files/public/minutes/2006-11-opening-plenary-slides.pdf,
slide 13:

Inappropriate Topics for IEEE WG Meetings
Don't discuss the validity/essentiality of patents/patent claims
Don't discuss the cost of specific patent use
Don't discuss licensing terms or conditions
Don't discuss product pricing, territorial restrictions, or market share
Don't discuss ongoing litigation or threatened litigation
Don't be silent if inappropriate topics are discussed…do formally object.

I agree with Margaret that closed design teams also need to know stuff
like this - the WG chairs and ADs need to know, but they may not be
the only ones.

Thanks,

Spencer