Subject: AW: Process vs disclaimers

From: Sebestyen Istvan ICN M SR 3 <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 11:18:05 +0100

Hi,

I think the topic - though in my view not really a main issue - is relevant
to an IPR working group, as its topic relates to "trade secrets", I mean
what if you receive a "trade secret" in error.

What my "engineer" logic would say to this is:

1) In standards work generally there is little (or no) room for "Trade
secrets", as standards work has to be an open process. So, in a normal
working group correspondance people are strongly encouraged not to use such
disclaimer in a message, because it does not make sense, and causes
irritation.

2) If in-spite of this you send me your "trade secret" really by an error
(so a message really not intended to go to the WG), is that your fault or
mine? Am I (and all members of the WG) really obliged to do "this and that"
to correct your error? Or do you offer me (and members of the entire Mailing
list) some kind of compensation for my (our) doing so?....

3) Perhaps a pragmatic solution might be to include in an IPR guide that
each time when such a message comes, it is assumed to be a message in error,
so all mailing list members should notify the source about the error, and
delete the message (without paying attention to its real content) from their
computer, because it is "trash" after all.

Regards,
Istvan Sebestyen

-----Ursprungliche Nachricht-----
Von: Randy Presuhn [mailto:[email-masked]]
Gesendet: Montag, 4. November 2002 23:27
An: [email-masked]
Betreff: Process vs disclaimers

Hi -

I'm running across more and more disclaimers like this one
in working group mailing list archives and on the mailing
lists themselves.  Should this WG address this topic?

...
> The information contained in this message may be privileged 
> and confidential and protected from disclosure.  If the 
> reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an 
> employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to 
> the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any 
> reproduction, dissemination or distribution of this 
> communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received 
> this communication in error, please notify us immediately by 
> replying to the message and deleting it from your computer.
...

 ------------------------------------------------------
 Randy Presuhn          BMC Software, Inc.  SJC-1.3141
 [email-masked]  2141 North First Street
 Tel: +1 408 546-1006   San Jose, California 95131  USA
 ------------------------------------------------------
 My opinions and BMC's are independent variables.
 ------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Ipr-wg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg
_______________________________________________
Ipr-wg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2002 14:12:36 +0100

As I understand it, everything we do in the IETF is
governed by the "Note Well" text (see http://www.ietf.org/overview.html).

So if someone sends a message to an IETF list with one of
these disclaimers at the end, I feel free to ignore the
disclaimer - it's the sender's problem, not mine.

My disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer.

   Brian

---

From: Scott W Brim <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2002 09:38:10 -0500

> My disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer.

Likewise, ianal.  If we have to have an IETF statement on such 
disclaimers, I suggest that the IETF say: If you are not sure if the 
message was intended for the list, simply ask the sender for 
confirmation, preferably directly but possibly on the list.