Ted:
The IETF legal counsel and insurance agent suggest that the IETF ought to
have an antitrust policy. To address this need, a lawyer is needed. As a
way forward, I suggest that IASA pay a lawyer to come up with an initial
draft, and then this draft be brought to the community for review and comment
(and probably revision). I think a new mail list should be used for the
discussion. Once the new mail list reaches rough consensus on the antitrust
policy document, I suggest using the usual process for adopting the policy as
an IETF BCP.
What do others think? I am open to suggestions for an alternative approach.
Sorry, can you expand on the threat model here? Are we developing one in
order to defend against some specific worry about our not having one?
Because it has become best practice in other SDOs? Because the insurance
agent wishes to see something in particular?
I hesitate to develop something that we have not needed in the past unless it
is clear what benefit it gives us. In particular, if we develop one without
some particular characteristic, do we lose the benefits of being where we are
now?
Recent suits against other SDOs is the source of the concern. The idea is t
make it clear which topics are off limits at IETF meetings and on IETF mail
lists. In this way, if such discussions take place, the good name of the IETF
can be kept clean.
Russ
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf