The IPR policy (controversial as it might be), has nothing to do with who
can post to an IETF list. There is no reasonable basis to limit posts
because a person is involved in other groups. It has nothing to do with
any so-called 'emphasis on design teams and directorates', which seems to
be little more than a codeword for suppression of certain viewpoints.
This is merely a transparent and inappropriate attempt to suppress certain
viewpoints, in apparent violation of RFC 2026 10.4(A). The IETF is to take
no position on the topic.
I note that Mr. Vixie has told me in the past that he supports the concept
of software patents. This is something that I and others involved with the
LPF, and John McCarthy, Don Knuth, Richard Stallman, and many, many other
luminaries of Computer Science, have fought against for many years.
Indeed, there is recently renewed interest in changing these laws, as
venture capitalists are finally beginning to come over to our side of the
debate.
It is quite clear where some people stand on the issue of intellectual
property. However, it is inappropriate for them to use their influence at
the IETF to suppress competing viewpoints in violation of the IETF
non-position.
Dean Anderson
Speaking as President of the League for Progamming Freedom
On Mon, 16 Jun 2003, Scott W Brim wrote:
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 01:56:10PM -0400, Dean Anderson allegedly wrote:
I think this is just a smokescreen. The real problem is that it didn't
get the outcomes desired by a certain group. It has nothing
whatsoever to do with scaling. Democracy scales just fine.
On 16 Jun 2003, Paul Vixie wrote:
What happened to open and inclusive?
it didn't scale. but, rather than change the written rules, more
emphasis has been put on "design teams" and "directorates" in order
to get work done in ways the written rules don't cover. note that i
think this is bad, and that the written rules should be changed, and
then followed, and that the way things are trying to get done now
has scaled even less well than before.
The original issue was that he felt like "they" were imposing an IPR
policy on him "from above". The IETF IPR policy, which ASRG was copying
from, has been worked out over more than ten years with lots of input
and a number of iterations. This has nothing to do with democracy or
design teams.