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

[Tony Rutkowski <[e-mail]>]

John et al.,

The provisions seem like a sensible means for reducing IETF antitrust 
litigation risk.  Some of the behavior manifested in the IETF over the 
years has resulted in potential exposure for the organisation because of 
the lack of such guidelines and their institutional enforcement.

You might find it useful to compare to similar recently strengthened 
provisions at ETSI - which has been drawn into rather costly litigation 
because those provisions were lacking and subsequently judicially 
mandated.   Competition authorities are exercising greater scrutiny 
today.  Essentially all standards bodies have similar provisions.  
Consider it litigation insurance.

best,
tony r


On 23-Oct-22 2:20 PM, John R Levine wrote:
>>> Sometimes reality intrudes anyway:
>>>
>>> https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/10/us/financial-aid-lawsuit-colleges.html 
>>>
>>
>> Really? You think a set of universities will use the IETF to
>> progress their secret plans?
>
> No, that's not how it works.  If US academics come to the IETF and 
> talk about how much tuition to charge, that would be enough to get 
> them dragged into this suit, regardless of what they say their 
> intentions are, or what their intentions actually are.
>
> That's why sensible people stay away from those red lines.
>
> Regards,
> John Levine, [e-mail], Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
> Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
>