ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Author disclosures and conflict of interest

2014-04-25 13:41:26
Larry,

Is this as simple as adding to the "by submitting this draft, all authors
confirm..." text?

I know that is not "signing" but when an I-D is posted with your details on it
as an author, you do get an automatic email so you have a chance to scream "it
wasn't me."

Adrian

-----Original Message-----
From: ietf [mailto:ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Lawrence 
Rosen
Sent: 25 April 2014 19:25
To: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: RE: Author disclosures and conflict of interest

Dave Crocker wrote:
The proper model for such an environment is that everyone
who participates is biased and has an agenda.

Dave, thanks for engaging in this important topic.

We all expect bias in standards organizations -- indeed it is a irreducible
factor in science and engineering and all human endeavors (and particularly
so in my profession, law!). I don't think anyone here is naïve about that.

Please don't demand more than is possible out of an ethics policy. But also
please don't give up the moral high ground just because we all fall short of
moral perfection. There is a middle way: Disclosure of potential conflicts
of interest that allows each of us to judge those biases for ourselves.

We should be expected to sign our contributions and disclose our potential
biases and conflicts of interest. Then the buyers will have reason to trust
the sellers.

/Larry


-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Crocker [mailto:dhc(_at_)dcrocker(_dot_)net]
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 10:46 AM
To: lrosen(_at_)rosenlaw(_dot_)com; ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: Author disclosures and conflict of interest

On 4/20/2014 10:18 AM, Lawrence Rosen wrote:
Such a disclosure requirement would further encourage everyone to
trust and implement IETF specifications.


Probably not.

Although the IETF has participation from the full range of academia,
research-ia, and industry, it's really and industry-driven environment,
since successful output of the IETF results in products and services.

The proper model for such an environment is that everyone who participates
is biased and has an agenda.

Seriously.  Expecting anything is frankly naive.

What mitigates that realistic view is balance among competing biases and
competing goals, and of course transparency in the processes and in the
details of what is produced.

Intellectual property is really the only area of potential opacity that
should (and does) concern us.

Trust in IETF work comes from timely utility, not abstract disclosures.

d/


--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net