ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: IETF subpoena processes update and a request

2017-03-24 11:33:13

On Mar 24, 2017, at 12:27 PM, John C Klensin <john-ietf(_at_)jck(_dot_)com> 
wrote:

IANAL either, but it seems to me that Jari's note suggests a
more basic question that is almost independent of jurisdictional
issues.  Suppose the IETF (or whomever) receives a subpoena that
names individuals or companies in a way that might be
unfortunate, contain implicit accusations that might be
completely unfounded,  or even, in the opinion of those parties
if they knew, were libelous, and suppose it directs IETF to not
disclose the subpoena in any way.  Without offering anything
resembling a legal opinion, it probably makes a difference
whether the subpoena is associated with a law enforcement action
rather than the civil actions for which I think the policies
were designed.

I know of no case of a civil subpoena that included a gag order

& yes, the procedures were deigned for civil cases (like patent prior art)

Scott