Re: [Bimi] Today's BoF
Richard Clayton <richard@highwayman.com> Wed, 03 April 2019 16:44 UTC
Return-Path: <richard@highwayman.com>
X-Original-To: bimi@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bimi@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2BF61200B6 for <bimi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Apr 2019 09:44:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sVD8ztG7LwOt for <bimi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Apr 2019 09:44:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.highwayman.com (happyday.demon.co.uk [80.177.121.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D936120094 for <bimi@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Apr 2019 09:44:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46755 helo=happyday.al.cl.cam.ac.uk) by mail.highwayman.com with esmtp (Exim 4.91) (envelope-from <richard@highwayman.com>) id 1hBj00-00027a-6S for bimi@ietf.org; Wed, 03 Apr 2019 16:44:28 +0000
Message-ID: <QIF3kaCeKOpcFAQA@highwayman.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2019 17:43:10 +0100
To: bimi@ietf.org
From: Richard Clayton <richard@highwayman.com>
References: <309EBD4AD64BE436663E721D@PSB> <CAAFsWK3uhFfeEt34wRJRQen1YVK4uNo=nxJoaGc4m84Y1J+ctQ@mail.gmail.com> <DD71F5FAA85F312FDB5EF7E4@PSB> <CAAFsWK3UgosY42U6sa-PwhWN5myhjVGiCkkYiC_jaDZZwF_wzw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAFsWK3UgosY42U6sa-PwhWN5myhjVGiCkkYiC_jaDZZwF_wzw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Turnpike Integrated Version 5.03 M <zm8$+Pxb77vLDPKLdqV+deXjOs>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bimi/6LABZ1r_IhzXMUIoUeZvvjyKmaY>
Subject: Re: [Bimi] Today's BoF
X-BeenThere: bimi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Brand Indicators for Message Identification <bimi.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/bimi>, <mailto:bimi-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/bimi/>
List-Post: <mailto:bimi@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bimi-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bimi>, <mailto:bimi-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2019 16:44:33 -0000
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 In message <CAAFsWK3UgosY42U6sa-PwhWN5myhjVGiCkkYiC_jaDZZwF_wzw@mail.gma il.com>, Wei Chuang <weihaw=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org> writes >Agreed that the VMC proposal which maps onto the existing trademark >framework including its warts. So yes agreed that this system will allow >for similar marks owned by different companies in different jurisdictions, >or across different lines of business. this uniqueness only within specific areas of commerce is a key aspect of the trademark system >Presumably its one that users live >with and presumably navigate in a reasonable fashion. yes ... purchasers can generally tell that this box contains widgets and that box (containing green floosits) is not from the same company despite the trademark being the same. So the "overloading" of the marks works moderately well in the real world (and when moderation is absent keeps lawyers in work) however emails inherently look the same as each other ... >Consequently there's >a set of recommendations in the VMC security perspective draft section 2.5 >and 2.7 particularly about the display and non-display of logos: >https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-chuang-ietf-bimi-security-perspectives- >00#section-2.5 2.5 says that jurisdiction should be done at the granularity of a nation state but the example in 1.1.2.1 draws attention to difficulties arising at at the state level ... ... and US trademarks do indeed operate at the state level: https://www.uspto.gov/trademarks-getting-started/process-overview/state- trademark-information-links this does not seem very consistent ... and as you fix this, please provide the semantics by which code can compare GPS coordinates with "US" or "VA,US" or "UK" or "RO" or even "EU". I suspect that political correctness means that residents of certain parts of the Middle East will not get any BIMI provided logos at all! - -- richard Richard Clayton Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. Benjamin Franklin 11 Nov 1755 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1 iQA/AwUBXKTinju8z1Kouez7EQKBUQCgr9stCmgS6JOnvKZ7K5LgrJwHoqcAnj1S FCeVP0aQJ3Ua0QL/PqahqTkM =HUa/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- [Bimi] Today's BoF John C Klensin
- Re: [Bimi] Today's BoF Wei Chuang
- Re: [Bimi] Today's BoF Dave Crocker
- Re: [Bimi] Today's BoF Wei Chuang
- Re: [Bimi] Today's BoF Dave Crocker
- [Bimi] Laches (was: Today's BoF) Richard Clayton
- Re: [Bimi] Today's BoF John C Klensin
- Re: [Bimi] Today's BoF John Levine
- Re: [Bimi] Today's BoF John C Klensin
- Re: [Bimi] Today's BoF Wei Chuang
- Re: [Bimi] Today's BoF Wei Chuang
- Re: [Bimi] Today's BoF Wei Chuang
- Re: [Bimi] Today's BoF Richard Clayton
- Re: [Bimi] Laches (was: Today's BoF) Wei Chuang
- Re: [Bimi] Laches Dave Crocker
- Re: [Bimi] Laches John Levine
- Re: [Bimi] Laches Dave Crocker
- Re: [Bimi] Today's BoF Wei Chuang