The PR-Action related aspects of a person using a bogus identity seem
easy to address, perhaps using the mechanism that Harald
suggested. However, the implications on IPR are much harder. In the
IETF, posting to a maillist and speaking at a meeting are two ways of
making contributions. If we have the ability to speak
anonymously, how can the contributions be traced to a real person or
company to support their IPR
This leads me to a conclusion that we need a clear policy stating
that communications need to be linked to the real, verifiable persons
OK, this is restating the point that I first thought about replying to, but
stopped myself the first time.
What problem is anonymous posting causing, that would not also be caused by
(for example) Spencer posting a draft saying
"By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79"
... if I won't disclose them?
Or Spencer posting an IPR statement that my IETF Sponsor Organization
does/does not have IPR that applies to a specific draft, and would/would not
be willing to execute licenses with specific terms ...
... if none of my statements are true?
I have a small imagination, but I'm having a hard time visualizing a
solution for this problem that doesn't include the words "organizational
membership". If we had that, no problem - you wouldn't accept IPR statements
from me, you'd accept them from my IETF Sponsor Organization, or at a
minumum, you'd assume that my IETF Sponsor Organization would fire me AND
sure me in court, if I misbehaved.
But we don't have organizational members, and if we did, the IETF would be a
very different place.
Could someone make some suggestions about how we would actually know that
communications are linked to real, verifiable persons making them? Ignoring
forged e-mail, etc. of course.
IETF mailing list