Dave Cridland <dave(_at_)cridland(_dot_)net> writes:
On Mon Nov 23 10:03:25 2009, Simon Josefsson wrote:
John-Luc said he is bound by confidentiality obligations from his
company, and I think the same applies to most employees of larger
organizations. There is nothing explicit in BCP 79 to protect
against
this apparent conflict of interest, or is there?
Being horribly naïve, I'd have thought that it was obvious that if you
cannot satisfy both your obligations as an employee, and your
obligations as an IETF participant, then one or other rôle has to be
dropped - ie, either you quit your job, or cease to participate within
the IETF. I simply don't see what other solution there is, or could
be, and I don't see what on earth BCP 79 could usefully say.
The document could say just that, if that is indeed the general opinion.
It may be useful for employees to be able to point at such text when
discussing the IETF rules internally with their organization.
I'm not sure if that text would have helped in this instance because it
is not clear whether the RIM employees were unaware of the obligations
in the IETF rules, or if they decided (or were ordered) to pursue
anyway. Referring to confidentiality obligations suggests the latter to
me, though, because otherwise you could simply have said you weren't
aware of the rules instead.
/Simon
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf