SSL.com votes Yes on ballot 206. Kind regards, Fotis Loukos
On 28/03/2018 06:20 πμ, Virginia Fournier via Public wrote: > > Ballot 206: Amendment to IPR Policy & Bylaws re Working Group Formation > > Purpose of Ballot: This ballot is the result of the work done by the > CA/Browser Forum (the “Forum”) Governance > Reform Working Group. > > The following motion has been proposed by Virginia Fournier of Apple and > endorsed by Tim Hollebeek of Digicert and Jos Purvis of Cisco to amend > the CA/Browser Forum Intellectual Property Rights Policy (“IPR Policy”) > and Bylaws of the > CA/Browser Forum (the “Bylaws”) regarding the formation of working groups: > > -- MOTION BEGINS – > > 1. Amendment to IPR Policy. The IPR Policy is hereby amended to read in > its entirety as set > forth on Exhibit A hereto (IPR Policy version 1.3, effective [date], > 2018). In summary, the > primary purpose of the amendment to the IPR Policy is to clarify that > patent licensing > obligations will be based on working group participation rather than > Forum membership. > > 2. Amendment to Bylaws. The Bylaws are hereby amended to read in their > entirety as set > forth on Exhibit B hereto (Bylaws version 1.9, effective [date], 2018). > In summary, the purpose > of the amendment to the Bylaws is to: > > * Set forth the processes required to set up and operate new Forum > working groups (each, a “Chartered Working Group” or “CWG”). > > * Clarify that a CWG can create its own subcommittees without full > Forum approval and according to the CWG’s own approval process. > > * Make clarifications regarding the handling of faulty ballot votes. > * Clarify the applicable process when there’s discrepancy between > proposed Guideline language in a ballot and language set forth in a > redline version attached to the ballot. > * Specify how to finalize minutes if there is no Forum meeting or > teleconference within 3 weeks after publication of the draft minutes. > * Clarify the meanings of the terms “Forum Meetings” and “Forum > Teleconferences." > * Approve the charter for the Server Certificate Working Group, which > will become the first Chartered Working Group (CWG). > * Allow already-existing working groups (“Legacy Working Groups” or > “LWG”) to continue operating under the old rules for up to 6 months, > and then transition to a Chartered Working Group (CWG) with a new > charter approved under Section 5.3 of the Bylaws to > continue thereafter; also clearly differentiate between Legacy > Working Groups and Chartered Working Groups. > * Correct the term used to define a CAB Forum member as a “Member” > rather than using various other terms to refer to the same thing > throughout the document. > * Correct non-substantive typos. > > > 3. Approval of Charter for Server Certificate Working Group. Pursuant to > Section 5.3.1 (Formation of Working Groups) of the amended Bylaws, the > charter for the Server Certificate Working Group attached hereto as > Exhibit C is hereby approved. > > 4. Applicability of Amendments. The amendments to the IPR Policy and the > Bylaws described in this ballot shall become effective 90 days after the > date on which the vote for approval is final, and shall not apply > retroactively. Any Draft Guideline Ballots already in the Review Period > when such amendments go into effect shall comply with the versions of > the IPR Policy and the Bylaws in effect when such Review Period began. > > -- MOTION ENDS – > > The procedure for approval of this ballot is as follows: > > BALLOT 206 > Formal discussion period: (7 days) > Start time: 20 March 2018 2:38 PM PDT (20 Mar 2018 21:38 UTC) > End Time: 27 March 2018 8:00 PM PDT (28 Mar 2018 3:00 AM UTC) > > Vote for approval (7 days) > Start time: 27 March 2018 8:30 PM PDT (28 March 2018 3:30 AM UTC) > End time: 3 April 2018 8:30 PM PDT (4 April 2018 3:30 AM) > > Votes must be cast by posting an on-list reply to this thread on the > Public Mail List. > A vote in favor of the ballot must indicate a clear 'yes' in the > response. A vote against must > indicate a clear 'no' in the response. A vote to abstain must indicate a > clear 'abstain' in the > response. Unclear responses will not be counted. The latest vote > received from any > representative of a voting Member before the close of the voting period > will be counted. Voting > Members are listed here: https://cabforum.org/members/ > > In order for the ballot to be adopted, two thirds or more of the votes > cast by Members in the CA > category and greater than 50% of the votes cast by members in the > browser category must be > in favor, and there must be a quorum. > > Pursuant to Section 2.3(d) of the Bylaws, each Member, and not the > Forum, will be responsible for taking precautions to make sure such > Member’s vote is submitted properly and counted. In the event that a > Member’s vote on a ballot is not submitted properly, such vote shall not > be valid and shall not be counted, and there shall be no appeal, revote > (except in the case of a new ballot submitted to all Members) or > other recourse. > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Public mailing list > [email protected] > https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public > -- Fotis Loukos, PhD Director of Security Architecture SSL Corp e: [email protected] w: https://www.ssl.com _______________________________________________ Public mailing list [email protected] https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
