Subject: Moving forward, take 2

From: Zenaan Harkness <[email-masked]>
Date: 29 Mar 2003 10:27:45 +1100

On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 03:57, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
> So -- I would welcome constructive suggestions on what sort of 
> structure might actually accomplish something.

At times it sounds like there might in fact be some willingness to
attempt to move toward some sort of resolution/ concensus/ further work,
and it also sounds like an I-D would go a long way toward us moving in
such a direction.

Has someone who feels strongly about this (eg. Bruce, LRosen, Russell,
??) had experience writing an ID and would they please do so. Scouring
the list for the two sides of the arguments, sans sarcasm and personal
attacks :), would perhaps be a good starting place at least. There have
been a number of constructive suggestions from both 'sides'.

zen

-- 
Mr Zenaan Harkness, Manager, VIDC
Phone: +678 25 151  Fax: +678 25 178  Mobile: +678 45 179
Please respect the confidentiality of this email.

_______________________________________________
Ipr-wg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg

---

From: [email-masked] (Bruce Perens)
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 17:26:06 -0800 (PST)

From: Zenaan Harkness <[email-masked]>
> ??) had experience writing an ID and would they please do so.

I expect to be writing a number of them around IPR and the consent
issue.

I think the consent issue is a much harder problem for IETF.

In order to demonstrate the consent problem, I was considering a
survey of the general counsel representing employers of known IETF
participants. But I think the problem is so bad that any such survey
would be a powder keg. Consider a survey like this:

	Dear <General Counsel>,

	Our organization participates, along with your company's employee
	<Employee>, in the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). We
	are concerned that your company continue its compliance with
	the intellectual property rules of that organization, which may
	require you to make certain disclosures regarding some of your
	patents and other intellectual property. We have enclosed a copy
	of those rules.

	Would you please complete the attached form, or visit the web
	URL <url>, to tell us:

		1. Have you granted <Employee> permission to participate
		   in IETF?

		2. Are you aware of the IETF's intellectual property
		   rules and their effect upon your company's
		   intellectual property, even if <Employee's>
		   participation is not connected with your company?

Some employees would have no problem with this. Some would be furious.
Some would be told to stop participating in IETF. Some might even be
shown the door by their employers. 

So, I'm afraid to even attempt to demonstrate the problem.

	Thanks

	Bruce

---

From: Scott W Brim <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 11:47:18 -0500

> Some employees would have no problem with this. Some would be furious.

That would surprise me.  I think you might look foolish in any case --
why not just send a single message to the IETF list asking participants
to reply directly and tell you themselves, instead of wasting money and
harassing lawyers?
_______________________________________________
Ipr-wg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg

---

From: [email-masked] (Bruce Perens)
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 09:50:51 -0800 (PST)

From: Scott W Brim <[email-masked]>
> That would surprise me.

Scott, I've done this once before, in the Free Software community, where
we found that some of our folks weren't really supposed to participate,
under their employment agreements, and some turned out to be legal
minors who should have had their parent or guardian participate in
copyrighting and licensing their own work. No kidding. Both can happen
here.

I've had a number of replies here, during the past weeks of discussion,
of the form "If I had to ask my employer, or their lawyers, I would
not be able to participate in IETF".

> I think you might look foolish in any case

A risk I'm used to taking.

> to reply directly and tell you themselves, instead of wasting money and

That's a good start.

	Thanks

	Bruce

---

From: Spencer Dawkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 20:30:19 -0800 (PST)

Bruce - 

What is the goal here? 

Spencer, who suspects that he may have missed an e-mail...