Re: The Sgt at Arms Please? RE: TLS-authz "experimental" standardPhillip -
----- Original Message -----
From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
To: TS Glassey ; dcrocker(_at_)bbiw(_dot_)net ; Theodore Tso
Cc: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 10:51 AM
Subject: Hallam-Baker's First Law of Internet Lawyering Was: The Sgt at Arms
Please? RE: TLS-authz "experimental" standard
Well I found it somewhat interesting that despite the fact that I was the
only person to co-author a submission to the IPR working group with an actual
lawyer I still received comments of the 'amateur lawyering kind' from folk who
were not lawyers and whose legalistic opinions had been flat contradicted by
those who are.
it is funny since Michael Baum used to refer to you as his IP law resource :-)
So without more ado:
First Law of Internet Lawyering: Anyone who accuses another of being
insufficiently qualified to state a legal opinion will in the same thread state
a legal opinion that they are not qualified to make.
Second Law of Internet Lawyering: Both opinions will be wrong
Third Law of Internet Lawyering: It won't matter.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: TS Glassey [mailto:tglassey(_at_)earthlink(_dot_)net]
Sent: Tue 15/01/2008 1:05 PM
To: dcrocker(_at_)bbiw(_dot_)net; Theodore Tso
Cc: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: The Sgt at Arms Please? RE: TLS-authz "experimental" standard
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Crocker" <dhc2(_at_)dcrocker(_dot_)net>
To: "Theodore Tso" <tytso(_at_)MIT(_dot_)EDU>
Cc: <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 4:23 PM
Subject: Re: The Sgt at Arms Please? RE: TLS-authz "experimental" standard
>
>
> Theodore Tso wrote:
>> Actually, to be fair, I don't think this can be laid at the feet of
>> the FSF. Todd Glassey replied to a message approximately 3 months old
>> with some legal reasoning that at best seems highly contorted, and at
>> worst total nonsense.
I love technololgists who claim their view of Law is the right on. Are you
suggesting we should resolve this in a court of law Dave?
>
>
> All of which raises the deeper question of why serious people are
> consuming the ietf mailing list posting responses to it.
Or perhaps a better quesiton is what the actual loading it created since you
labeled it as "consuming" the list's available bandwidth.
>
> d/
>
> --
>
> Dave Crocker
> Brandenburg InternetWorking
> bbiw.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf