While I do think that the IAOC should be aware of the potential legal
implications of where we hold our meetings, I wonder if we are
treating China unfairly in this discussion...
On Oct 5, 2009, at 2:30 PM, Cullen Jennings wrote:
The PGP Key signing is a good question - I have no idea - it's
certainly something we have done in the past but if it is not legal
in the PRC, I could live with a meeting where we did not do any PGP
key signing. It detracts a bit from the meeting but is not in what I
consider the mediatory must have core of the meeting. Of course this
would mean that a group of people that did not often travel out of
the PRC would be missing a great opportunity to sign with a group of
people outside of China which I view as one of the benefits of
having a meeting in Beijing.
Do you know if the PGP signing (and taking the keys home) was legal
when we did it in France? It is my understanding that there are (or
were) French laws forbidding the export of crypto. However, I don't
remember this being raised as a big concern when we held the IETF in
Paris.
Did we hire a Swedish lawyer to determine if all of our planned
activities were legal before going to Stockholm?
Does anyone know what laws there are about public assembly and/or
public discussion of political issues in Japan?
I realize that there is a lot of concern about going to China, and
some of it may be justified. But, we should also be careful that we
don't end-up holding China to a higher standard than other countries
that we visit. If we believe that we should only go to countries
where a specific set of activities are legal, we should (IMO) itemize
those activities and seek to determine that they are legal in all of
our destination countries before we commit to going there.
Perhaps this is something that we could expect our host to help us
determine?
Margaret
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf