Re: Local Beijing people response - RE: Request for community guidance on issue concerning a future meeting of the IETF

[Hui Deng <[e-mail]>]

Dave,

Thanks for your clarification, now I understand this has converged to
a more contract language issue.
At this stage, I may not be able to help on the detail languages since
I guess the hoster or IAOC already
have been deeply involved in it.

Anyhow, I apprecaite that you make everybody more clear on it, thanks.
Lastly, I think that everybody have to self-censor about what he does.

Thanks for the discussion

-Hui

2009/10/2 Dave CROCKER <[e-mail]>:
> Hui,
>
> Hui Deng wrote:
>>
>> 1) I personally have attended several standardization meetings such as
>> 3GPP and 3GPP2 in China,
>
> Many of us have attended meetings in China and we have found them productive
> and enjoyable.  However all of those other groups conduct their business in
> a way that is significantly different from the unruly style of the IETF.
>
>>  3) IETF is doing technical stuff, I don't see why we need to be involved
>> in political stuff.
>
> This has been explained repeatedly.  First, there is legitimate technical
> work in the IETF that touches topics which are explicitly prohibited by the
> contract language.  Second, the style of IETF discussions often includes
> individual comments which are likely to violate the contract.  This unruly
> speech is a consequence of a core principle in the open style of IETF work.
>
>
>> 4) China is one of the major member of United Nations, anyhow, come here
>> and see
>
> Hui, this really has little to do with "China".
>
> Rather, the problem is with contract language that I believe we would never
> accept for any other venue.
>
>        The only reason we have a debate about this because
>        we are so /eager/ to have an IETF meeting in China!
>
> Some folk say that we should ignore the language in the draft contract,
> because it will not be enforced, except under extreme circumstances.  First,
> it is never appropriate for people signing a contract to assume that it
> won't be enforced, especially when they cannot really know the exact
> conditions that will cause it to be enforced.  (The term "fiduciary
> responsibility" covers this.) Second, these assurances are coming from
> people who cannot speak for the hotel or the government.  Hence, they are
> merely guessing.
>
> Let's be specific:
>
>>   "Should the contents of the Group's activities, visual or audio
>>   presentations at the conference,or printed materials used at the
>>   conference (which are within the control of the Client) contain
>
> Note how extensive this is.  We are required to control material and speech
> by everyone, yet the IETF has never really controlled the material or speech
> of /anyone/.
>
>
>>   any defamation against the Government of the People's Republic
>
> Defamation is really a rather vague word, especially among most of us do not
> know how it is actually used in China.  (Let's be fair.  I suspect most of
> us do not know how it is used as a legal term in the US, or any other
> country...)
> So we need to be afraid of violating this, without really knowing what is
> permitted and what is prohibited.
>
>
>>   of China, or show any disrespect to the Chinese culture, or
>
> Disrespect is an even more vague term and it is coupled with "culture" which
> could mean anything having to do with the country's government, history or
> population, and could even cover reference to Chinese people anywhere in the
> world.
>
> Worse, comments made in the IETF are often disrespectful.  We wish they
> weren't, but again, this is a consequence of how the IETF conducts its
> business.  So the IETF really is being required to make guarantees that
> change its basic style of operation.
>
>
>>   violates any laws of the People's Republic of China or feature
>
> Language that says that we won't violate the host country's laws is, of
> course, not necessary -- the laws are the laws and anyone violating them has
> a problem, no matter whether it is referenced in the contract -- but it
> probably doesn't hurt to include it.  Or rather, the only reason to include
> it is to set the stage for the financial consequences, specified later...
>
>
>>   any topics regarding human rights or religion without prior
>>   approval from the Government of the People's Republic of China,
>
> As has been noted by several folks, the IETF does work that necessarily
> requires discussing topics that are relevant to human rights.  And again, we
> also have the problem of trying to restrict spontaneous comments that might
> violate these conditions; yet we have never done that.
>
>
>>   the Hotel reserves the right to terminate the event on the spot
>>   and/or ask the person(s) who initiates or participates in any or
>>   all of the above action to leave the hotel premises immediately.
>
> This gives the Hotel complete freedom to shut the meeting down according to
> its own interpretation of conditions that are extremely vague.  That's not a
> reasonable contract condition for us to agree to.  (Here's where "fiduciary
> responsibility" becomes the real focus, when making an agreement.)
>
>
>>   The Client will support and assist the Hotel with the necessary
>>   actions to handle such situations. Should there be any financial
>>   loss incurred to the Hotel or damage caused to the Hotel's
>>   reputation as a result of any or all of the above acts, the Hotel
>>   will claim compensation from the Client."
>
> Again, this appears to make us financial responsible for the hotel's
> actions. And the financial exposure is not limited.  We cannot reasonably
> know how large the financial risk is.
>
> Some folk keep noting that the agreement is with the host, not the IETF.
> Nonetheless, it is the IETF that is expected to honor the conditions of the
> agreement.  So the IETF must decide whether is /can/ and /should/ agree to
> such conditions.
>
> Would the IETF agree to such contract language were the meeting to be in
> Singapore, Amsterdam or Seattle?  I believe we wouldn't.
>
> The problem, here, is with contract language, not a country's culture or
> government.
>
> d/
>
>
> --
>
>  Dave Crocker
>  Brandenburg InternetWorking
>  bbiw.net
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
>