Re: [Gendispatch] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-03.txt

[Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>]

Hiya,

On 23/10/2022 04:18, John Levine wrote:
> It appears that Stephen Farrell  <[e-mail]> said:
>> -=-=-=-=-=-
>> -=-=-=-=-=-
>> -=-=-=-=-=-
>>
>> It's been a while, so apologies if I've forgotten some of
>> the argument but this still seems to be based on a
>> counterfactual assumption that every IETF participant has
>> to care about antitrust.
>>
>> For example, as an academic I don't need to and won't avoid
>> "red flag" topics as suggested here.
> 
> If you showed up at the IETF, and discussed with other academics how
> many students you plan to admit in each field, and how much tutition
> you will charge them, or what stipends you will give them, that would
> surely be a problem if any of the academics were from the U.S.

I have to say that is the least convincing utterly
unrealistic argument I've seen in a long time;-)

> Red flags are red flags, even if they don't have transistors attached.

The concept of a red-flag as per this draft is a bad
idea. It is true some topics are problematic in terms
of competition law for some people, but that just does
not imply those same topics are problematic for all
participants.

S.

> 
> R's,
> John