I appreciate that there need to be disincentives to infringing the IPR policy,
but I'm a little wary of the idea of codifying a system of sanctions. Mainly
for the sorts of "gaming the system" thinking they engender:
-- Is the benefit of infringing worse than the cost of the sanction?
-- If it's not sanctionable, it must be ok!
Plus, if there are sanctions, then you need a judgement process to decide when
the sanctions will be applied. Is the IETF set up for that?
Rather than bright lines and clear sanctions, it seems like a general culture
of conservatism, staying far away from things that could possibly be construed
as violations, would be more in tune with the way other things work at the IETF.
No real answers here, just expressing a gut reaction.
--Richard
On Jan 26, 2012, at 6:11 PM, Pete Resnick wrote:
Just a heads-up:
Adrian Farrel and I started work on a draft to focus discussion on sanctions
that could be applied to violators of the IETF's IPR policy. Because of
incidents like the present one, we've each been asked by WG chairs and others
what can be done in response to such violations. We've centered our draft
around sanctions that are available under current IETF procedures, not
introducing new ones. The draft should be available in the I-D repository
soon. We think this could usefully become an RFC and we would welcome
discussion.
Thanks,
pr
--
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
_______________________________________________
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