On Sep 9, 2011, at 3:02 AM, Lars Eggert wrote: > Hi, > > thanks, Ben. We will incorporate most of your suggestions in the next > revision. That said: > > On 2011-9-8, at 0:22, Ben Campbell wrote: >> -- Section 6 suggests side meetings should be (somehow "informally") covered >> by NOTE WELL. I think this is a very dangerous suggestion. The rest of the >> document suggests that a side meeting has no official standing. That seems >> to me to mean it's no different than a group of people who coincidentally >> participate in the IETF having a dinner or bar meeting on any subject at any >> time. Or a hallway conversation, for that matter. By the logic of this >> section, I can't really figure out how "informal" a meeting would need to be >> before it no longer fell under NOTE WELL. >> >> In an informal meeting, the participants should be able to follow any IPR >> policy they like. I can even imagine an informal meeting covered by an NDA, >> where the participants want to decide if they want to have further >> discussions of a subject under IETSF IPR rules or not. >> >> I think the best we can hope to do is suggest that side meeting organizers >> and participants be explicit with their expectations on IPR and >> confidentiality, so there is less chance for down-stream surprises. If we >> want something stronger than that, then we really need to create a new >> category of "official" meeting. > > We actually ran this question past the IETF legal counsel before adding that > section to the document. It was his stated opinion that the Note Well > applies. I therefore don't see what we could do here. >
Did the counsel describe the triggers that causes Note Well to apply in general? Because if it automatically applies to an unofficial side meeting, then it's hard for me to see where it _doesn't_ apply when 2 or more IETF participants have a conversation. For example: _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
