Re: Proposed IETF Privacy Policy for Review

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Wed, 16 March 2016 17:38 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E87F312DA65 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Mar 2016 10:38:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.501
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.501 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 q_bNz210GDEG for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Mar 2016 10:38:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (abusenet-1-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:1126::2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 450E912DA98 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Mar 2016 10:37:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 20034 invoked from network); 16 Mar 2016 17:37:23 -0000
Received: from unknown (64.57.183.18) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 16 Mar 2016 17:37:23 -0000
Date: 16 Mar 2016 17:37:01 -0000
Message-ID: <20160316173701.25701.qmail@ary.lan>
From: "John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Proposed IETF Privacy Policy for Review
In-Reply-To: <17115C4E-37ED-456E-8CFA-17D12F5628EE@sobco.com>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/fOJXdkfcFa-bnXO8vx95ntMbWTY>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2016 17:38:10 -0000

>but, even if we clearly say “we never do that” we still need to have the section since 
>California law says that we need to have such an ability for people to ask  (its also the kind of thing that the EU
>wants to see)

Why is California law relevant?  The IETF's legal bits are in Virgina
or maybe D.C., not California.

R's,
John