On Sep 22, 2009, at 1:10 PM, Adam Roach wrote:
On 9/18/09 14:02, Sep 18, Paul Wouters wrote:
Pre-emptively excluding countries based on culture, (perceived) bias,
or other non-technical and non-organisation arguments is wrong. So
if the
visa issues are not much worse then for other countries, and an
internet
connection not hampered by a Great Firewall, I see no reason to
single
out China.
The majority of the conversation so far has related to a clause that
we will be forced to accept as a condition of meeting in China. It
is not directly related to their "culture" or "(perceived) bias."
The conversation would be equally valid (and probably contain many
of the same arguments) if we were being asked to make a
substantially similar agreement to meet in, say, Ireland.
"Should the contents of the Group's activities, visual or audio
presentations at the conference, or printed materials used at the
conference (which are within the control of the Client) contain any
defamation against the Government of the Republic of Ireland, or
show any disrespect to Irish culture, or violate any laws of the
Republic of Ireland or feature any topics regarding human rights or
religion without prior approval from the Government of the Republic
of Ireland, the Hotel reserves the right to terminate the event on
the spot and/or ask the person(s) who initiates or participates in
any or all of the above action to leave the hotel premises
immediately."
Could you imagine the uproar? Would it be anti-Irish sentiment? Or
would it be objecting to an unacceptable policy?
We'd say our hosts had been drinking a little too much fine Irish
whiskey and either ignore it or just mark it out and send it back.
There's no way we'd sign that. It's a human right to argue about human
rights!
Of course, if one were to defame Ireland in a downtown Dublin pub, one
might expect to be asked to step outside, or just get punched in the
nose on the spot. After all, being offensive is its own reward. But
one still wouldn't expect to see this type of ballast added to a
hospitality contract. Why? Because in the free world, defaming the
government, disrespecting a culture, discussing human rights, and
discussing religion might be rude, or they might be the subjects of
perfectly appropriate academic discussions, but they are not illegal.
And there's no way we should be holding an IETF meeting in any
location where such discourse is illegal. It's against everything we
have fought for with the Internet for many, many years.
Ole says:
I'm sure that's great advise from the lawyers, but you don't typically
get to negotiate clauses that are required by national law. We'd
obviously love to have it removed or reworded since this would remove
any (some?) concern, but as Ray says, it's the law.
If you don't like the law, don't enter its jurisdiction.
--
Dean
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf