--On Thursday, January 29, 2009 0:58 -0600 Dean Willis
<dean(_dot_)willis(_at_)softarmor(_dot_)com> wrote:
The real risk is where some other SDO can hold IETF liable for
damages induced by the irrational aggrievement of someone who
contributed to the IETF.
I might add "aggrievement" (rational or otherwise) of someone
who contributed to the work in the IETF and suddenly finds him
or herself unable to obtain a copy of the derived and updated
standard except at a high per-copy price backed by credible
threats of prosecution for illegal copies. The IESG could
probably figure out ways to head off that particular situation,
which, personally, I'd consider A Good Thing too, but it is
rather a different topic.
While we can't do much about the
irrational contributor, we can at least avoid making express
commitments to indemnify third parties who use our
pre-5378-note-well specifications. This puts the conflict
between the irrationally aggrieved party and the third party,
leaving the IETF out of the shooting, which is a Good Thing.
Yes, exactly.
john
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf