Re: Draft IAB conflict of interest policy

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

On 13-Jan-20 06:37, Cullen Jennings wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Jan 8, 2020, at 4:14 PM, IAB Chair <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>>
>> The IAB requires that all Covered Individuals disclose their main employment, sponsorship, consulting customer, or other sources of income when joining the IAB or whenever there are updates.
> 
> Say one of my sources of income involved dead fish and does not have any COI with work of IETF. I don’t think it is reasonable to expect disclosure of that. If at some point a COI did arise from this, then I think it would be reasonable to disclose at that time. This may just be a bit confusing on how to I should read  “main” and “other sources of incoming” 

If the IAB signed contracts or employed people, that question might even be worth discussion. As it is, I think this whole discussion is massive overkill and possibly exposes IAB members to new risk. As long as IETF LLC, which actually executes contracts and pays staff, has an adequate COI policy, I think we are fine as we are.

BCP 39 makes it fairly clear that the IAB does not need a separate COI policy. This text was inserted on legal advice from Jorge Contreras, as the IETF's pro bono counsel at the time, who said it was intended to 'protect IAB members from personal liability for IAB decisions (particularly in view of the last paragraph, stating that they serve as "individuals")':

>    Members of the IAB shall serve as individuals, and not as
>    representatives of any company, agency, or other organization.
>    Members of the IAB shall owe no fiduciary duty of loyalty or care to
>    IAB, IETF, IRTF or IESG.

The last sentence in particular seems to make a formal COI policy unnecessary and possibly harmful. Wouldn't such a policy nullify that protection that IAB members have had since May 2000?

Can we see the legal advice that led to the current proposal?

Regards and IANAL,
     Brian