[Iasa20] Legal responsibility of LLC Board

"Brad Biddle" <brad@biddle.law> Sun, 10 February 2019 22:43 UTC

Return-Path: <brad@biddle.law>
X-Original-To: iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51BED129508 for <iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Feb 2019 14:43:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=biddle-law.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 tPdX6ZGxXd7i for <iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Feb 2019 14:43:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pl1-x635.google.com (mail-pl1-x635.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::635]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BFD5912941A for <iasa20@ietf.org>; Sun, 10 Feb 2019 14:43:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pl1-x635.google.com with SMTP id o6so4362270pls.13 for <iasa20@ietf.org>; Sun, 10 Feb 2019 14:43:32 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=biddle-law.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=FjZ2n26/auNCLzWEqXWlcHI7Z6o/s6LfRFhtCNyXjBw=; b=pk+OylTxsE2oxYaj9De8k07oQrFZat4vL3nXvk25jb6vQfikMD8zrL3+Y5vhnVPwaP 6z5kKra8BqMaTXwFRMVTaPLM1BCmj1G15p2m5vXqGxAYDcZqP1A2vqUmIDHBW90PZQTg 4WFm+EJWcaYRzUqzqARmRJE/XF+aQssz9EFAPYa416YeVELGQ7Axhc6LZNmAo54C0Ezq Jg85zLBRmmb1dXQ5zDnT4ujoxUMcsQWx7AZt3NCoK9HoFpIjnpNYmdPMeIbDUMU9cp/Z zsc587/sDdPg6kPavEVaUiFH1UtuA1rGlahjTIXFwT7hvzD1oECX/am5ivfEgLsK9UPA Xsng==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=FjZ2n26/auNCLzWEqXWlcHI7Z6o/s6LfRFhtCNyXjBw=; b=L7NSvVdQxnXuexvXnIk/pocQnm6qXh5UPxiU0K1fWYdq0rZx3key+yJedai2Ne1TV7 NBVfxd15c7di0J3UTf/712GPKV7FpBlNRF6a8Xwv+Il46iu7IekVJ5ydT7vVJoyFZ+t7 tvYHkQWvQofKOFuI4O0Lpojm3SaoTodmitEUhwQD8GPAe1+W5vVkQtF/z4eYQXAyQL+O 605D+/aTN3940Y6NBVLNP502YEjr3uf0F864JM/c5J1iu/tugzrq/iMgZWJ//zSkt1ts aqLm71C4TaL6O2k3mlF4dOpnEPtNq4a/BHoN+atV3m9tzE0wfHYhHRb0c9ofcgm/wbwb zOGg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAubu4X49WnGE0Ul+GEqXEVdwcEcxUQAaYfaSZH/K/XTffdEhQ/m5 aHMu1y7yVMbf/atr2/B6ikyYB/5G6j8=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3Ib/D6MM3aJwGFrnxon2iRhSJ10DF9mr7VsIrkMnDBcJPqv+R4tXxu4IHOyAmT3bkIBLr711Cg==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:bf0c:: with SMTP id bi12mr34996399plb.0.1549838611433; Sun, 10 Feb 2019 14:43:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.86.28] (c-76-115-0-16.hsd1.or.comcast.net. [76.115.0.16]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g7sm1790441pfm.10.2019.02.10.14.43.30 for <iasa20@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 10 Feb 2019 14:43:30 -0800 (PST)
From: "Brad Biddle" <brad@biddle.law>
To: "IASA 2 WG" <iasa20@ietf.org>
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2019 14:43:29 -0800
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.12.4r5594)
Message-ID: <75976103-4373-4A9E-9D14-C20193C6BDC3@biddle.law>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; markup=markdown
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/iasa20/3pgmYcgR91uRjUcahdWs6lAWGsk>
Subject: [Iasa20] Legal responsibility of LLC Board
X-BeenThere: iasa20@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: =?iso-8859-1?q?Discussions_relating_to_reorganising_the_IETF_administrative_structures_in_the_so_called_=93IASA_2=2E0=94_project=2E?= <iasa20.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/iasa20>, <mailto:iasa20-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/iasa20/>
List-Post: <mailto:iasa20@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:iasa20-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iasa20>, <mailto:iasa20-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2019 22:43:35 -0000

Greetings all. IETF legal counsel here. A few quick thoughts arising in 
part from this thread [1], but applicable more generally too, I suspect.

The LLC Board is ultimately responsible for the actions of the LLC, and 
they cannot abdicate this responsibility. If in good faith they believe 
that a proposed contract is illegal, for example, or would cause the LLC 
to violate contractual obligations that the LLC has towards ISOC under 
the LLC Agreement, or would otherwise cause such harm to the IETF that 
the individual Board members would be violating their duties to act in 
the best interest of the IETF, then they are obligated to act, as a 
legal matter. If another body in the IETF said “look, we don’t care 
that you think this is illegal or unethical or would cause massive 
liability or whatever — we think it’s fine, and your job is just to 
do what we tell you to do and we insist you execute this contract,” 
the Board would be correct to refuse. The Board is required to meet 
their obligations under applicable corporate and contractual law as the 
parties ultimately responsible for the acts of the LLC as a legal 
entity, and they cannot hand this ultimate responsibility to others.

To be clear, this was certainly the case under ISOC as well. If a body 
in the IETF insisted that ISOC enter into an agreement on its behalf, 
but the ISOC Trustees believed that doing so would conflict with their 
legal duty as Trustees (board members) to act in the best interest of 
ISOC (for example), ISOC would have rightly refused to do so.

That said, the LLC Board can otherwise be extraordinarily deferential to 
other bodies within the IETF. For example, if there is a collective 
understanding that Body A will identify person X for a role, and that 
the LLC will then contractually engage person X, that’s perfectly 
fine. The legal concern only arises if we appear to be saying that Body 
A has power to supersede the ultimate judgment of the LLC Board in 
connection with the actions of the LLC. The LLC Board can be extremely 
deferential, but they must retain ultimate responsibility for the 
LLC’s acts.

Hoping this is clarifying and not confusion-inducing. Happy to discuss, 
of course.

—Brad

Brad Biddle | brad@biddle.law | +1.503.502.1259 (mobile) | 
http://biddle.law



[1] 
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/iasa20/izvnwsqC2v1YSSncCoU4ClRZ_qI