On Feb 6, 2014, at 12:52 PM, Pete Resnick
<presnick(_at_)qti(_dot_)qualcomm(_dot_)com> wrote:
Let's first separate what goes on the web site (and importantly, the
registration page) from what gets put on a slide in the room.
That's good; that's now what was sent in this thread.
I have no quarrel with legalese appearing on the registration page; it's not
particularly useful to the participants, but it's legal rear-end-covering,
for whatever that's worth. It's really between you and your corporate
attorney what to make of it.
No, it's more than that. It is also a way of saying "here's what we really
mean".
But the old (currently posted) version on a slide in the room is,
pragmatically speaking, content-free and useless to the IETF and to the
participants. It gives no notice whatsoever that what is contained in the
referenced documents has anything to do with intellectual property. And
really, we know that almost nobody reads the Note Well in the room, and we
have ample evidence (in the form of late disclosures and bogus disclosures)
that many people don't know what it means.
All true. So instead of making the engineering mistake of "let's optimize and
everything will be fine", maybe make the different engineering mistake of
"let's use a level of indirection and assume it will get dereferenced". That
is, the note in the room is "you already agreed to the Note Well when you
registered; it said important things for this meeting".
Unlike on the registration page, the point of making the statement in the
room is to avoid late surprises for the WG in their work.
That is one of the main points for both the registration and in the room.
So, I really do not find the current Note Well useful on a slide in the room
at all.
Fully agree. Replacing it with a worse one is not the answer.
But I do see a point in having the chair say (or display) in the room, "Just
in case you didn't actually read what is posted on the web page[1] that you
acknowledged when you registered, please note: You've got IPR disclosure
responsibilities if you participate in this discussion at all (including
writing, speaking, singing or otherwise). If you or your employer has IPR on
this stuff, get with it!"
Or: "Just in case you didn't actually read what is posted on the web page[1]
that you acknowledged when you registered, please note: You've got IPR
disclosure responsibilities if you participate in this discussion at all
(including writing, speaking, singing or otherwise). It is in everyone's best
interest, including yours and your companies, if everyone has read it." Your
last sentence above is legal advice from a chair who is likely to be below
average among chairs at communication skills and below average among chairs at
understanding IETF procedures.
If we're not going to have simple text available in the room, let's at least
stop with the charade that posting the Note Well is meaningful, and the
chairs and shepherds and the IESG will simply have to continue to deal with
the regular stream of late disclosures.
Works for me.
--Paul Hoffman