Note that the suit does not complain about the 3GPP and ETSI rules. It alleges
instead that the rules were not enforced, and that the leadership of these
organization failed to prevent the alleged anti-competitive behavior of some
companies.
I believe that our current rules are fine. They were specifically designed to
prevent the kind of collusion described in the complaint. Yes, these rules were
defined many years ago, but the Sherman Antitrust Act is even older -- it dates
from 1890. We have an open decision process, explicit rules for intellectual
property, and a well-defined appeals process. If the plaintiffs in the
3GPP/IETF lawsuit had been dissatisfied with an IETF working group, they could
have use the IETF appeal process to raise the issue to the IESG, and the
dispute would probably have been resolved after an open discussion.
Rather than trying to set up rules that cover all hypothetical developments, I
would suggest a practical approach. In our process, disputes are materialized
by an appeal. Specific legal advice on the handling of a specific appeal is
much more practical than abstract rulemaking.
-- Christian Huitema
-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Joel jaeggli
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2011 8:56 AM
To: Jorge Contreras
Cc: Ted Hardie; IETF Chair; IETF; IESG
Subject: Re: An Antitrust Policy for the IETF
On 11/28/11 12:58 , Jorge Contreras wrote:
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 2:35 PM, GTW <gtw(_at_)gtwassociates(_dot_)com
<mailto:gtw(_at_)gtwassociates(_dot_)com>> wrote:
__
Ted, I like your approach of enquiring what problem we are striving
to solve and I like Russ's concise answer that it is "Recent suits
against other SDOs that is the source of the concern"
Russ, what are some of the "Recent suits against other SDOs" It
would be good to pin down the problem we are addressing
There is FTC and N-data matter from 2008
http://www.gtwassociates.com/alerts/Ndata1.htm
George -- one recent example is the pending antitrust suit by True
Position against ETSI, 3GPP and several of their members (who also
employ some IETF participants, I believe). Here is some relevant
language from the Complaint:
When or if that suit is concluded you may be able to divine whether the
antitrust policy of either SDO was of any value.
"100. By their failures to monitor and enforce the SSO Rules, and to
respond to TruePosition's specific complaints concerning violations
of the SSO Rules, 3GPP and ETSI have acquiesced in, are responsible
for, and complicit in, the abuse of authority and anticompetitive
conduct by Ericsson, Qualcomm, and Alcatel-Lucent. These failures
have resulted in the issuance of a Release 9 standard tainted by these
unfair processes, and for the delay until Release 11, at the earliest,
of a 3GPP standard for UTDOA positioning technology. By these
failures, 3GPP and ETSI have authorized and ratified the
anticompetitive conduct of Ericsson, Qualcomm, and Alcatel-Lucent and
have joined in and become parties to their combination and conspiracy."
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf