On 06/11/2012 17:43, Russ Housley wrote:
> Brian:
> 
> Jorge has reviewed this text.  He says that the current text and this 
> proposed text are both summaries.  Both say that it is important to read the 
> BCP to get all of the details.

OK, good. On reflection my feeling is that we definitely need the introductory
paragraph stressing the disclosure requirement, but I remain bothered by taking
out all the details. I understand there is a problem of attention span,
but there are not really all that many words in the current version.

   Brian

> Russ
> 
> 
> On Nov 6, 2012, at 10:25 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> 
>> I don't much like the change in approach. I think it will be too easy
>> to brush off; the current approach has enough substance that people
>> who brush it off put themselves in a very weak position.
>>
>> The old text was written with legal advice. What does counsel say
>> about the new proposal?
>>
>> Regards
>>   Brian Carpenter
>>   Cell phone during IETF85: +1 847 219 0880
>>
>> On 06/11/2012 15:00, IETF Chair wrote:
>>> The IESG is considering a revision to the NOTE WELL text.  Please review 
>>> and comment.
>>>
>>> Russ
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> === Proposed Revised NOTE WELL Text ===
>>>
>>> Note Well
>>>
>>> This summary is only meant to point you in the right direction, and
>>> doesn't have all the nuances. The IETF's IPR Policy is set forth in
>>> BCP 79; please read it carefully.
>>>
>>> The brief summary:
>>>  - By participating with the IETF, you agree to follow IETF processes.
>>>  - If you are aware that a contribution of yours (something you write,
>>>    say, or discuss in any IETF context) is covered by patents or patent
>>>    applications, you need to disclose that fact.
>>>  - You understand that meetings might be recorded, broadcast, and
>>>   publicly archived.
>>>
>>> For further information: Talk to a chair, ask an Area Director, or
>>> review  BCP 9 (on the Internet Standards Process), BCP 25 (on the
>>> Working Group processes), BCP 78 (on the IETF Trust), and BCP 79 (on
>>> Intellectual Property Rights in the IETF).
> 
> 

Reply via email to