Re: Complaint v2 to IESG regarding censorship of dissent

[IETF Chair <[e-mail]>]

==[ processing note ]==
The IESG observes that the appeal text uses non-conformant notices inconsistent with the IETF policies as outlined by the IESG Statement on Clarifying Derivative Works Rights [1].  In processing the appellant’s previous appeal, the IESG also noted this issue and requested removal [2].

The IESG reiterates that “any process owner required to handle a Contribution with … a [non-conformant legal] notice can require the notice be removed” and that “repeated inclusion of such notices may be considered a disruption and moderated” [1]. 

In the interest of the community having an available appeal venue, the IESG is choosing to accept this appeal and ignore the non-conformant text.  The rationales on why such notices may be disruptive as outlined in [2] [3] do not apply in this case.  Unlike a WG, plenary, or non-WG lists, this request was directed to the IESG mail alias for processing.  The IESG has ready access to legal counsel to review and accept the risk of such claims. 
 
[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/statement-iesg-statement-on-clarifying-derivative-works-rights/
[2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/iesg/appeals/artifact/219
[3] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/d5tK-Ut1QZtgSaodWGC2MCgwqcw/
[4]  slide #8 of the IETF 124 plenary materials, https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/124/materials/slides-124-ietf-sessc-2-ietf-124-plenary-part-2-00
==[ processing note ]==

Hi Dr. Bernstein!

With this email, I am confirming that the IESG has received and accepted your appeal.  Multiple versions were received, but the IESG intends to process the latest, v2.

Regards,
Roman Danyliw
(as IETF Chair, for the IESG)

-----Original Message-----
From: D. J. Bernstein <[e-mail]> 
Sent: Monday, November 24, 2025 1:45 PM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: Complaint v2 to IESG regarding censorship of dissent

[omitted]