Re: [antitrust-policy] Who enforces an Antitrust Policy for the IETF

Jorge Contreras <cntreras@gmail.com> Fri, 20 January 2012 21:37 UTC

Return-Path: <cntreras@gmail.com>
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 3205A21F84D0 for <antitrust-policy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 13:37:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.001, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZIRguB9Mx+Kf for <antitrust-policy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 13:37:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wi0-f172.google.com (mail-wi0-f172.google.com [209.85.212.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DC6D21F84CE for <antitrust-policy@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 13:37:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: by wibhn9 with SMTP id hn9so1006545wib.31 for <antitrust-policy@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 13:37:53 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=E6rEPP2Vb6+pWJgJKBqyDuZraZOSXUsuHmpC4VIj18I=; b=xFH9Jp12UwMb9GhKWhpVBbNOx2Hh/ERaXWSEsUooaVYsE9zOJa/qpIPeWsfDgw1z/4 k24sLwefAIT1TJ5s/qaejRXRPWy2QqMsGgYL7MUGpLxmEg/TAgo+0D+S7x40zz/Sop4T meHhNNmoVu1XO6A4iOmjKOnS3f4nipJXFk8yg=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.180.19.168 with SMTP id g8mr54873733wie.4.1327095473447; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 13:37:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.223.63.211 with HTTP; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 13:37:53 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAJNg7VLiWghrQzspePaAxBhyofaA74-zE+MT6vffseUrcurtVw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20120115212301.36291.qmail@joyce.lan> <7B596953-050E-4388-BC9D-60BDFE0505A2@vigilsec.com> <CAJNg7VLiWghrQzspePaAxBhyofaA74-zE+MT6vffseUrcurtVw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 15:37:53 -0600
Message-ID: <CAP0PwYbjn=+s5J-n3p5pkvukL5QM4uAstqGSrf-O=Gkz8q85TA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jorge Contreras <cntreras@gmail.com>
To: Marshall Eubanks <marshall.eubanks@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>, antitrust-policy@ietf.org, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
Subject: Re: [antitrust-policy] Who enforces an Antitrust Policy for the IETF
X-BeenThere: antitrust-policy@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 20 Jan 2012 21:37:55 -0000

I would not anticipate an official "enforcer" either.  A main benefit
of the policy is to provide IETF (i.e., ISOC/IETF Trust) a defense if
it is sued for an antitrust violation committed by its participants.
At least the organization can say: "We don't condone that type of
behavior.  See our policy that expressly prohibits it."

On 1/20/12, Marshall Eubanks <marshall.eubanks@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> wrote:
>> John:
>>
>>>> If you observe behavior in violation of these guidelines at an IETF
>>>> meeting, please do not be silent; formally object.
>>>
>>> What does that mean?  Let's say I hear two guys in the next row
>>> talking about product pricing.  I say, hey, you can't talk about that.
>>> They laugh at me and continue.  Now what?
>>>
>>> Or if this instruction or something like it goes into the Note Well,
>>> it's making every IETF attendee responsible for the behavior of
>>> everyone else.  If someone's hauled into court, they're going to say
>>> well, gee, the IETF specifically tells people to police anti-trust
>>> violations, nobody said anything to us about it, so the IETF agreed
>>> with what we did.
>>>
>>> I have trouble imagining a problem this mess is supposed to solve that
>>> is anywhere near as ugly as the swamp it's leading into.
>>
>> I'd like to think that we do not need to assign someone to enforce the
>> antitrust policy.
>>
>> I see them a guidelines for proper behavior.  When we see someone do
>> something surprising on a mail list (such as posting a job opening) they
>> person gets a lot of private messages to stop.  If they continue, public
>> messages follow.  This usually gets the behavior corrected.  This is in
>> like with the story shared by Brian.
>>
>
> +1
>
> Marshall
>
>> Russ
>> _______________________________________________
>> antitrust-policy mailing list
>> antitrust-policy@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/antitrust-policy
> _______________________________________________
> antitrust-policy mailing list
> antitrust-policy@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/antitrust-policy
>