[cabf_governance] Ballot 206 and Official Version of the Bylaws

Tue Sep 4 04:14:10 MST 2018

I just happened to review some legal documents related to Subscriber 
Agreements and while I was reading section 5.5 about IPR policies and 
the need to re-sign in case of amendments, I believe there must be a 
better way to handle modifications than the current practice.

Here is a sample language that could be incorporated in section 5.5 of 
the Bylaws or in a new section.

--- BEGIN ---

      Modifications to IPR Policy

The Forum may revise the IPR Policy from time to time. Any such change 
shall be notified to the Members, Associate Members and Interested 
Parties by any convenient way and in any case, shall be binding and 
effective fourteen (14) days after publication of the changes in the IPR 
Policy, or upon notification to the Members, Associate Members and 
Interested Parties by e-mail. If the Members, Associate Members and 
Interested Parties do not raise concerns or oppose to the provisions of 
the updated IPR Policy within fourteen (14) days after publication of 
the new IPR Policy, the Forum will treat such use by the Member, 
Associate Member or Interested Party as acceptance of the updated IPR 
Policy.

If a Member raises concerns or opposes to the provisions of the new IPR 
Policy within the fourteen (14) days period, then the Member’s  Forum 
membership shall default to an Associate Membership until the new IPR 
agreement is explicitly signed and returned by the Member.

If an Associate Member or Interested Party raises concerns or opposes to 
the provisions of the new IPR Policy within the fourteen (14) days 
period, then its participation in Forum calls, meetings, activities, and 
events shall be suspended until the agreement is explicitly signed and 
returned.

--- END ---

Some of this language could be made more explicit, for example the form 
of notification to Members, Associate Members and Interested Parties. 
Would an e-mail to the management list suffice? Perhaps a personal 
e-mail from the Forum Chair to each participant would be a better solution.

The current Bylaws have a 90-day window for Participants to sign and 
return the update IPR Policies. If this is the agreed "reasonable" time 
to review amendments to an existing document, then we should change the 
14 days to 90.

Of course, the language needs to be reviewed and tweaked by legal folks 
but we should be able to come up with the proper words to avoid the 
re-signing part. Of course each Member will still have time to review 
and raise concerns or objections to any updates.

Thoughts?
Dimitris.

On 4/9/2018 7:39 πμ, Ben Wilson via Govreform wrote:
>
> Here is the redlined differences between the attachment to Ballot 206 
> and the 4APR18 version on the website.
>
> *From:* Govreform <govreform-bounces at cabforum.org> *On Behalf Of *Ben 
> Wilson via Govreform
> *Sent:* Monday, September 3, 2018 4:33 PM
> *To:* CA/Browser Forum Governance WG List <govreform at cabforum.org>; 
> Virginia Fournier <vfournier at apple.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [cabf_governance] Ballot 206 and Official Version of 
> the Bylaws
>
> I'm away from my laptop until later tonight.  I'll send it then.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From:*vfournier at apple.com <mailto:vfournier at apple.com> 
> <vfournier at apple.com <mailto:vfournier at apple.com>> on behalf of 
> Virginia Fournier <vfournier at apple.com <mailto:vfournier at apple.com>>
> *Sent:* Monday, September 3, 2018 12:04:37 PM
> *To:* Ben Wilson; CA/Browser Forum Governance WG List
> *Subject:* Re: [cabf_governance] Ballot 206 and Official Version of 
> the Bylaws
>
> Hi Ben,
>
> I’d like to see what those changes are before making a choice.  I 
> remember having to create a version 1.8 of the Bylaws before I could 
> create a version 1.9, so I’m not sure what would be missing.  Thanks.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Virginia Fournier
>
> Senior Standards Counsel
>
>  Apple Inc.
>
> ☏669-227-9595
>
> ✉︎vmf at apple.com <mailto:vmf at apple.com>
>
> On Sep 1, 2018, at 7:56 PM, Ben Wilson via Govreform 
> <govreform at cabforum.org <mailto:govreform at cabforum.org>> wrote:
>
> Gov Reform WG,
>
> Today I was going through the Bylaws on GitHub to update them from 
> version 1.7 to version 1.9 (to match changes by Ballot 216 (v.1.8) and 
> Ballot 206 (v.1.9).  As Wayne mentioned during the Validation WG call, 
> Ballot 206 inadvertently removed some changes made by Ballot 216.  
> We’ll have to figure out how to remedy this, but most likely with a 
> ballot.
>
> Also during this process, I think I noticed discrepancies between what 
> was on GitHub and what we have on the website.  For instance, the 
> version on the website uses the term “CWG” but the one on GitHub uses 
> “Working Group”. Also, I think that some of the changes made in 
> section 2.3(c), 2.4(b) and 2.4(c) by Ballot 216 are preserved in the 
> GitHub version, but removed in the website version.
>
> I’ve reviewed the different versions of the Bylaws v. 20Feb2018, v. 
> 20MAR18, and 4APR18, and it appears that the changes happened in 
> between the 20-Feb version and the 4-Apr version.
>
> Here are some solutions to the inconsistencies:
>
> 1 - just update GitHub with the April 4^th version, which we’ve all 
> been using and which is the one on the Website.
>
> 2 - use the current GitHub version (which is based on the March 20 
> version), and revert the CABF Website version 1.9 to what was in the 
> March 20^th version (and then have a ballot that bring is up to the 
> April 4 version).
>
> Under either approach, there are other changes that we’d need to do to 
> fix some of the missing Ballot 216 language and re-insert it.  And 
> there are a few other changes we could make with a ballot, like a few 
> cross references that need to be fixed and a replacement of the ETSI 
> audit reference with “ETSI EN 319 401”.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ben
>
> _______________________________________________
> Govreform mailing list
> Govreform at cabforum.org <mailto:Govreform at cabforum.org>
> https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/govreform
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Govreform mailing list
> Govreform at cabforum.org
> https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/govreform

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cabforum.org/pipermail/govreform/attachments/20180904/c4d929e3/attachment-0001.html>