Re: [antitrust-policy] New Version Notification for draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-08.txt

Jay Daley <jay@staff.ietf.org> Fri, 01 March 2024 15:53 UTC

Return-Path: <jay@staff.ietf.org>
X-Original-To: antitrust-policy@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: antitrust-policy@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F091CC15153F for <antitrust-policy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Mar 2024 07:53:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.908
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.908 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=staff-ietf-org.20230601.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fdWrKWVDM2Td for <antitrust-policy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Mar 2024 07:53:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wm1-x329.google.com (mail-wm1-x329.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::329]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9E2A2C151531 for <antitrust-policy@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Mar 2024 07:53:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wm1-x329.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-412cb60ade7so3104385e9.3 for <antitrust-policy@ietf.org>; Fri, 01 Mar 2024 07:53:54 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=staff-ietf-org.20230601.gappssmtp.com; s=20230601; t=1709308432; x=1709913232; darn=ietf.org; h=references:to:cc:in-reply-to:date:subject:mime-version:message-id :from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=/kYlMLzaWY5R8+j5nBKoR+qG59SO7WKsVSfx8EeT6as=; b=fLSAmx1hnVs0ntDmA0QCgoxWj2cSKSNgVskY7cMt/CYmvmhTly3GEiZEU5YeoSQbaK A7aB91y/yXKBIXz0k8DM/aq4WaN2PJaPG6HbEDgXN+e7N2Fz8wTCiskSEVwyvz8sMc/R ALiBZgwZ/VA2TsACa6FzNseRNRsvWfwGqUXvQ6fGu7ZOOLSMO3mthGiIuA1LvxRnYdam /58SAIRX4gXOB4nifBj0LA6ZQ27CwV/iKJ0RsvVWZae5jqNgtSGsfMfmRLZ6QoT4hN3W qMysaPIy+nlLmNIAWD8U+VSUDlRpyWDvJYt9ZSddPC9qI4nUlxMELEB3Po+ww6QcT6DT pDFg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1709308432; x=1709913232; h=references:to:cc:in-reply-to:date:subject:mime-version:message-id :from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=/kYlMLzaWY5R8+j5nBKoR+qG59SO7WKsVSfx8EeT6as=; b=vC+p5II5pVoDhgAPmofjSNOfI9QdF5IGXVo8u9Q77OaGH/eCGcjOzAs5sso3AGHYLh laHE08+onYUAJff6rO241j9EhoRjbhjJY+UtMuwL2M7zAM9av+ZGlBx6KBD9XYkWWhg9 5QDYexD/9QVa5l3DPU1MCYbFXK5fzZYUvB1pnPbOSTMe0TNQQRgURi+y1wIuORQnidBc 6whuB0t5rmBUInL/SDL0G/BaoKy9swmOLAo4ai4+ZMz3pRH5Bt/m3mzpFit9UzwY4dmp 6xCsn0qtgI6U0Hq37mxLNoioZbMMzjTwBe+zN2/M4gw4p0FCLTvnDymW+MJQD08Z7LeT kEXg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzqjsoicL+6W5GRtT/NdX9dBfD0pshKFIZkNAnWwKzogwWwphUr d6kScQikLl6ZeGlIpFf05hWfZ4qb/NdVAwqrwlAAGgxOBmr2Jadqnb1pZgAAj0v8UaOCSectn0x B2Zs=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEC6vWdFdLRbuWuUcr4X+8LSFO7BDJgRw7B9+VlqPfF6UueugivKUK79m/DO09U0ebmIMfNtQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:4508:b0:412:b6c4:ac21 with SMTP id t8-20020a05600c450800b00412b6c4ac21mr1912080wmo.41.1709308432154; Fri, 01 Mar 2024 07:53:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (host-92-27-125-209.static.as13285.net. [92.27.125.209]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id fl13-20020a05600c0b8d00b00412ce8f092asm184770wmb.27.2024.03.01.07.53.51 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 01 Mar 2024 07:53:51 -0800 (PST)
From: Jay Daley <jay@staff.ietf.org>
Message-Id: <ED981364-7087-47DF-AE83-539D4BA067E8@staff.ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_D89CA75E-4EE1-4082-9630-FCA499145318"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3774.400.31\))
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2024 15:53:41 +0000
In-Reply-To: <013e01da6bec$9c086260$d4192720$@olddog.co.uk>
Cc: antitrust-policy@ietf.org, Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
References: <170924133688.22191.501196370379528149@ietfa.amsl.com> <1AE485F0-0DD8-4D0B-9581-1F3B2B3ABAA2@staff.ietf.org> <00f301da6bd3$6dfcb380$49f61a80$@olddog.co.uk> <1C8F88D0-F64B-4CCF-99F3-EE3CD181E6D3@staff.ietf.org> <013e01da6bec$9c086260$d4192720$@olddog.co.uk>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3774.400.31)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/antitrust-policy/-oG0onLgRIw9K5svJTIxwX_ha-s>
Subject: Re: [antitrust-policy] New Version Notification for draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-08.txt
X-BeenThere: antitrust-policy@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discuss the need for an antitrust or competition policy for the IETF." <antitrust-policy.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/antitrust-policy>, <mailto:antitrust-policy-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/antitrust-policy/>
List-Post: <mailto:antitrust-policy@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:antitrust-policy-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/antitrust-policy>, <mailto:antitrust-policy-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2024 15:53:59 -0000

Hi Adrian

> On 1 Mar 2024, at 15:24, Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> Hey Jay,
> 
>>> I think a key piece of advice is missing (yes, I see 4.2). It may be too
>>> obvious, but surely you should be saying "individuals are recommended to
>>> seek legal advice" somewhere highly prominent. For example, lifting and
>>> tweaking a paragraph from BCP79 and placing it at the end of Section 1...
>>> 
>>>  This document is not intended as legal advice.  Readers are advised
>>>  to consult their own legal advisors if they would like a legal
>>>  interpretation of antitrust laws, the risks, and their responsibilities.
>> 
>> Section 4.2 is intended to be exactly that so I’m confused as to why you
>> would apparently dismiss it and then ask for the same thing?  Is it just a
>> matter of where it goes or is the language in 4.2 insufficient or do you
>> think we need both 4.2 and the new text above?
> 
> Did I dismiss it?

That's what I took from "(yes, I see 4.2)" with no further mention of it, but from your response it seems as if that was not the intent so I misunderstood. 

> Maybe it is just the prominence. I wrote my comment having read the Abstract, Introduction, and Section 2. I was starting on Section 3 when the thought occurred.

Thanks - I will talk to my co-author.


On the earlier question of referencing the COIs and whistleblower service, I have conferred with colleagues who note that all the COI policies are easy to find on the web site, (except for one, which we are investigating), and that the whistleblower service is the first result when searching for " IETF whistleblower".  Given that, there’s a strong preference not to have links in the RFC that need to be maintained, or for us to maintain a page at a stable link that then links to these COIs.  However, if you think the effort would be worth it then please let me know.

thanks again 
Jay


-- 
Jay Daley
IETF Executive Director
exec-director@ietf.org