<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:13 AM, <a href="mailto:kirk_hall@trendmicro.com" target="_blank">kirk_hall@trendmicro.com</a> <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:kirk_hall@trendmicro.com" target="_blank">kirk_hall@trendmicro.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Trend Micro never favored the IPR requirements in the first place. As I recall, it was pushed by some of the browsers.</span></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Microsoft and several CAs.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">As I said in my earlier post, I can live with requiring an IPR Agreement (reluctantly) for Forum membership, and maybe for membership on Working Groups, as participants may
be actively involved in drafting new requirements. But I see no reason to require it for postings to a public list-serv open to everyone to post and read if we establish one. I think we should, just keep it separate from the Management@ and Public@ list-servs,
which would continue to be for members and interested parties only.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Right now, if someone posts to the Questions@ address (which does not require signing an IPR agreement), all Forum members see the post already – so if we as members are
somehow being fed private IP information subject to secret patents, it is already happening with no IPR agreement. </span></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Exactly so.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Reposting to the Public list (as people have done in the past) does not “expose” CABF members to any new ideas – they already saw all the ideas from the original post to
the Questions@ list. The only difference is that with reposting NON-members get to see the same post, and any response. So to be blunt, I think claiming there is an IPR issue in reposting messages already sent to and viewed by Forum members via the Questions@
list is totally without merit.</span></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Sure. But that's not what the bylaws state. Our bylaws restrict who can post to the public list. If we truly mean it to be just a technical control, then I can trivially circumvent that by setting up an auto-forwarder, at which point, it makes more sense just to open the public list to the public and dispense with any notion of a private, members-only list.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">And if Google and Mozilla allow public postings to your lists without an IPR agreement – the Forum should do the same.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Let’s come up with a solution at the Cupertino meeting. There has been a desire for more openness and allowing some way for the public to participate in our deliberations,
and this should be easy to solve.</span></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I wish I shared your optimism, considering that this was actively discussed in the 1.5 years leading to the IPR policy. </div></div></div></div>