RE: Author disclosures and conflict of interest

["Adrian Farrel" <[e-mail]>]

Larry,

Is this as simple as adding to the "by submitting this draft, all authors
confirm..." text?

I know that is not "signing" but when an I-D is posted with your details on it
as an author, you do get an automatic email so you have a chance to scream "it
wasn't me."

Adrian

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Lawrence Rosen
> Sent: 25 April 2014 19:25
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: RE: Author disclosures and conflict of interest
> 
> Dave Crocker wrote:
> > The proper model for such an environment is that everyone
> > who participates is biased and has an agenda.
> 
> Dave, thanks for engaging in this important topic.
> 
> We all expect bias in standards organizations -- indeed it is a irreducible
> factor in science and engineering and all human endeavors (and particularly
> so in my profession, law!). I don't think anyone here is naïve about that.
> 
> Please don't demand more than is possible out of an ethics policy. But also
> please don't give up the moral high ground just because we all fall short of
> moral perfection. There is a middle way: Disclosure of potential conflicts
> of interest that allows each of us to judge those biases for ourselves.
> 
> We should be expected to sign our contributions and disclose our potential
> biases and conflicts of interest. Then the buyers will have reason to trust
> the sellers.
> 
> /Larry
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Crocker [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 10:46 AM
> To: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: Author disclosures and conflict of interest
> 
> On 4/20/2014 10:18 AM, Lawrence Rosen wrote:
> > Such a disclosure requirement would further encourage everyone to
> > trust and implement IETF specifications.
> 
> 
> Probably not.
> 
> Although the IETF has participation from the full range of academia,
> research-ia, and industry, it's really and industry-driven environment,
> since successful output of the IETF results in products and services.
> 
> The proper model for such an environment is that everyone who participates
> is biased and has an agenda.
> 
> Seriously.  Expecting anything is frankly naive.
> 
> What mitigates that realistic view is balance among competing biases and
> competing goals, and of course transparency in the processes and in the
> details of what is produced.
> 
> Intellectual property is really the only area of potential opacity that
> should (and does) concern us.
> 
> Trust in IETF work comes from timely utility, not abstract disclosures.
> 
> d/
> 
> 
> --
> Dave Crocker
> Brandenburg InternetWorking
> bbiw.net