Re: [antitrust-policy] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust/

[Pete Resnick <[e-mail]>]

[Trimming down to a couple of particular bits...]

On 24 Feb 2023, at 19:33, Brad Biddle wrote:

> Mark suggests that this part of 4.2 is too broad and could be
> narrowed to focus on the scenario when "such a discussion results in
> something that's open to all but advantages some party through the
> structure of the agreement." Pete conveyed general support for these
> concerns, and noted generally that "speaking in terms of specific 
> examples
> instead of trying to be broad would clarify things greatly."
> [...]
> the kinds of risks that Section 4.2 points to are potentially both
> broader and more nuanced than the scenario Mark describes, and I think 
> that
> trying to address the issues at the level of specificity that Mark 
> (and
> perhaps Pete) suggests would require a document that would start to 
> look
> like a legal treatise on antitrust law. I think the best we can do in 
> this
> style of document is a general (yellow/caution) flag-waving around a
> category of risk, coupled with a suggestion to obtain advice as 
> needed.

The example I gave (discussing "employee compensation or benefits") and 
the examples Stephen gave ("product pricing" and "supply chains") come 
from section 4.1, not 4.2, but they suffer the same problem of the 
unqualified use of the term "collective bargaining" in 4.2: By using 
non-specific terminology, you are unintentionally including things that 
are perfectly permissible in IETF discussions and would not incur 
anti-competition risk. If instead you used more specific terms like 
"wage-fixing and anti-poaching agreements" instead of "employee 
compensation or benefits", or "product price fixing" and "bid-rigging" 
instead of "product pricing" and "supply chain", or as Mark pointed out 
"exclusive negotiations" instead of "group negotiations", that would 
avoid the ambiguity and the kind of chilling effect that Alissa is 
concerned with. That's not a legal treatise on antitrust law; it's just 
being a bit more specific instead of using overly general terminology.

pr
-- 
Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/
All connections to the world are tenuous at best