Re: Legal umbrella etc (Re: What to incorporate)
Dean Anderson <dean@av8.com> Sun, 05 September 2004 08:23 UTC
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA17428; Sun, 5 Sep 2004 04:23:49 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C3sLo-0006HP-Iy; Sun, 05 Sep 2004 04:26:41 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C3sBE-00009f-Oz; Sun, 05 Sep 2004 04:15:20 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C3s92-0008Cz-Ib for ietf@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 05 Sep 2004 04:13:04 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA16862 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 5 Sep 2004 04:12:56 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from cirrus.av8.net ([130.105.36.66]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C3sBM-0001nG-Ow for ietf@ietf.org; Sun, 05 Sep 2004 04:15:54 -0400
Received: from cirrus.av8.net (cirrus.av8.net [130.105.36.66]) (authenticated bits=0) by cirrus.av8.net (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i858AkTn023945 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Sun, 5 Sep 2004 04:10:50 -0400
Date: Sun, 05 Sep 2004 04:10:46 -0400
From: Dean Anderson <dean@av8.com>
X-X-Sender: dean@cirrus.av8.net
To: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
In-Reply-To: <E17C66D579B6921D8990F8BB@askvoll.hjemme.alvestrand.no>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0409050312430.22295-100000@cirrus.av8.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by cirrus.av8.net id i858AkTn023945
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: e8c5db863102a3ada84e0cd52a81a79e
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Legal umbrella etc (Re: What to incorporate)
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: a92270ba83d7ead10c5001bb42ec3221
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sat, 4 Sep 2004, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote: > > > --On lørdag, september 04, 2004 04:16:11 -0400 Dean Anderson <dean@av8.com> > wrote: > > > So it would appear that the ISOC supervises what goes on. > > ISOC does have a role in the process. "Supervise" is not a word I would use > to describe it. > > > I note that both RFC 2031 and Vint Cerf's History indicates that the > > POISED group recommended that the IETF should be split from the ISOC into > > a separate legal entity. 8 years later, this still hasn't been done. > > I can't see where RFC 2031 says that (I can see the document saying that > the two are different, but not where it says that IETF should be a legal > entity). Can you quote, please? I may have misread the draft, and on second read, I think I should mute my somewhat critical tone, a bit. I was focusing too much on this: ====================================================================== One of the more obvious recommendations that came out of the Poised WG was to move all non technical issues that can be moved safely, to ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ another related organization. The Poised WG finds that the Internet ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Huizer Informational [Page 1] RFC 2031 IETF-ISOC Relationship October 1996 Society (ISOC) is the obvious choice for this task. A straw poll at the open plenary session of the IETF in december 1995 in Dallas clearly confirmed this notion. ====================================================================== And missing the part on the next page (above) that says the ISOC is the "obvious choice for this task". But overall, we still have essentially the same alternatives as before: ====================================================================== There are three alternatives: - Do nothing and ignore the increasing responsibility and growth; the risk here is that the IETF either becomes insignificant, or will be suffocated by US law suits. Huizer Informational [Page 3] RFC 2031 IETF-ISOC Relationship October 1996 - The IETF does everything itself; this keeps the IETf in control, but it would distract enormously from the technical work the IETF is trying to get done. - The IETF finds another organization than ISOC to take on the role described above. But why would another organization be better than ISOC? ====================================================================== I note that one alternative to being "suffocated by US law suits" is to be scrupulously law abiding, and scrupulously honest, and scrupulously ethical, and scrupulously cognizant of an organization's legal obligations and responsibilities, including its responsibilities for the actions of voluteers. I found that the LPF could organize boycotts, protest rally's and other potentially risky and legally controversial activities while similarly using much volunteer labor, yet avoid 'suffocating legal entanglement' by being scrupulously responsible and honest, and being very careful to make sure that volunters understood what was required of them and what could and couldn't be allowed. I also found that reading books on tort and business law is a good supplement to college coursework on Business Law. Beyond that, having access to sympathetic Law Professors who will patiently explain both sides of a question is also a great benefit. Of course, this same benefit can be obtained by hiring a competent attorney and asking them tough questions and providing them with brutally honest information about both sides of a question. There is no way to avoid 'suffocating legal entanglement' yet act contrary to one's legal responspibilities. The task of an organizations executive is to make sure that the organization performs its responsibilities, legal, finanical, social, and otherwise. I am always reminded of this excerpt from a news report about Alan Brown of ORBS.ORG: ====================================================================== The judge in the case disagreed entirely and said the Mr Brown had failed to show his comments came from an honestly held belief that they were true. Instead he said they were more of a personal attack. Mr Brown also claimed the legal defence of fair comment, but the judge said that fair comment was based on an informed argument but Mr Brown has made no attempt to separate fact and opinion. The judge was also unimpressed by the fact that when Mr Brown was offered the chance to apologise, he reacted by making further defamatory allegations. The judge also said that a key motivator behind Mr Brown was the financial welfare of his ISP. The judge said of comments made on the Internet: "I must say I know of no forum in which an individual citizen has the freedom to say what he likes and in any manner he wishes about another individual citizen with immunity from suit for all consequences." And so he made sure there wasn't. ====================================================================== A telling and significant problem with the POISED WG and RFC 2031 is also revealed by the acknowledgement section: ====================================================================== Acknowledgement and disclaimer The author is chair of the Poised 95 WG. The author has tried to summarise e-mail and face to face discussions in the WG. All the good ideas in this paper are the result of the WG, all the mistakes and errors are probably due to the author or his lack of command of the ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ American language as well as the American legal system. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ The author is a member of the Internet Society. Author's Address Erik Huizer SURFnet ExpertiseCentrum bv P.O. Box 19115 3501 DC Utrecht The Netherlands Tel: +31 302 305 305 Fax: +31 302 305 329 E-mail: Erik.Huizer@sec.nl ====================================================================== _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
- Options for IETF administrative restructuring Leslie Daigle
- Re: Options for IETF administrative restructuring John C Klensin
- Options for IETF administrative restructuring Leslie Daigle
- Re: Options for IETF administrative restructuring Leslie Daigle
- Re: Options for IETF administrative restructuring Paul Vixie
- Re: Options for IETF administrative restructuring JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
- Venue selection (Re: Options for IETF administrat… Harald Tveit Alvestrand
- Re: Venue selection (Re: Options for IETF adminis… Iljitsch van Beijnum
- Re: Venue selection (Re: Options for IETF adminis… JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
- RE: Options for IETF administrative restructuring Christian de Larrinaga
- Re: Venue selection (Re: Options for IETF adminis… Michael Richardson
- RE: Options for IETF administrative restructuring Harald Tveit Alvestrand
- Re: Options for IETF administrative restructuring Brian E Carpenter
- What to incorporate (Re: Options for IETF adminis… Harald Tveit Alvestrand
- RE: What to incorporate (Re: Options for IETF adm… Christian de Larrinaga
- Re: What to incorporate (Re: Options for IETF adm… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: What to incorporate (Re: Options for IETF adm… Susan Harris
- Re: What to incorporate (Re: Options for IETF adm… Carl Malamud
- Re: What to incorporate (Re: Options for IETF adm… Susan Harris
- Re: What to incorporate (Re: Options for IETF adm… Leslie Daigle
- Re: What to incorporate (Re: Options for IETF adm… Dean Anderson
- Re: What to incorporate (Re: Options for IETF adm… Dean Anderson
- Re: What to incorporate (Re: Options for IETF adm… Harald Tveit Alvestrand
- Re: What to incorporate (Re: Options for IETF adm… scott bradner
- Re: What to incorporate (Re: Options for IETF adm… Adrian Farrel
- Re: Options for IETF administrative restructuring scott bradner
- Re: What to incorporate (Re: Options for IETF adm… avri
- RE: Options for IETF administrative restructuring Wijnen, Bert (Bert)
- RE: Options for IETF administrative restructuring Steve Crocker
- Budget numbers (Re: What to incorporate) Harald Tveit Alvestrand
- Legal umbrella etc (Re: What to incorporate) Harald Tveit Alvestrand
- Re: Legal umbrella etc (Re: What to incorporate) Dean Anderson
- Re: What to incorporate (Re: Options for IETF adm… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Options for IETF administrative restructuring Aaron Falk
- RE: Options for IETF administrative restructuring Wijnen, Bert (Bert)
- RE: Options for IETF administrative restructuring graham.travers
- RE: Options for IETF administrative restructuring Margaret Wasserman
- Re: Options for IETF administrative restructuring Eliot Lear
- RE: Options for IETF administrative restructuring graham.travers
- Re: Options for IETF administrative restructuring Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Options for IETF administrative restructuring avri
- RE: Options for IETF administrative restructuring John C Klensin
- Re: Options for IETF administrative restructuring Pete Resnick
- Explosive bolts [Re: Options for IETF administrat… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Options for IETF administrative restructuring Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Options for IETF administrative restructuring avri
- Re: Options for IETF administrative restructuring Margaret Wasserman
- Re: Explosive bolts [Re: Options for IETF adminis… Pete Resnick
- Re: Explosive bolts [Re: Options for IETF adminis… scott bradner
- Re: Options for IETF administrative restructuring Sam Hartman
- Re: Explosive bolts [Re: Options for IETF adminis… Paul Vixie
- Re: Explosive bolts [Re: Options for IETF adminis… Carl Malamud
- Re: Options for IETF administrative restructuring Aaron Falk
- Re: Options for IETF administrative restructuring Sam Hartman
- Re: Options for IETF administrative restructuring Leslie Daigle
- RE: Options for IETF administrative restructuring Steve Crocker
- RE: Options for IETF administrative restructuring Fred Baker
- Re: Explosive bolts [Re: Options for IETF adminis… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Explosive bolts [Re: Options for IETF adminis… John C Klensin
- Re: Explosive bolts [Re: Options for IETF adminis… Harald Tveit Alvestrand
- Re: Explosive bolts [Re: Options for IETF adminis… Lynn St.Amour
- There is no proposal on the table for *IETF* inco… Pete Resnick
- Re: There is no proposal on the table for *IETF* … Margaret Wasserman
- Re: There is no proposal on the table for *IETF* … Lynn St.Amour
- Re: Options for IETF administrative restructuring John C Klensin
- ISOC board meeting comes AFTER IETF meeting this … Steve Crocker