[cabfpub] Draft Ballot re: participation of standards-setting, auditing, and regulatory body representatives

Robin Alden robin at comodo.com
Fri Oct 19 04:34:07 MST 2012


Hi Gerv,
	Although this isn't really my area of expertise, surely people
sign the IPR in some particular capacity.  
If they are representing more than one organization then they need to
sign (or to be excused from signing) the IPR in each capacity in which
they act. 
https://www.cabforum.org/IPR_Agreement_V1.pdf


The IPR agreement says that any contribution from a signer of the IPR
that makes its way into a published Guideline goes with an RF licence.  

The assumed difference between the nature of the contributions made by a
standards or regulatory body and the contributions made by us mere
mortals (CAs and Browsers and other Interested Parties) is that we have
'tricks of the trade' that we might (or might not) have IP protection
over and which we might (or might not) want to have incorporated into
Guideline - whereas the standards or regulatory body does not have
tricks of the same trade.  They might have IP in the auditing or
regulating or other spaces but that's not what the CABF is about.

If we decide to allow standards and regulatory bodies to enter without a
signed IPR then it is because we are prepared to accept that any
material provided by a representative of a standards or regulatory body
which makes its way into a Guideline is provided unencumbered - or that
if it later becomes apparent that it is encumbered that we are content
to accept the remedies provided in law absent the IPR.

Robin


> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-bounces at cabforum.org [mailto:public-
> bounces at cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Gervase Markham
> Sent: 19 October 2012 09:12
> To: ben at digicert.com
> Cc: public at cabforum.org
> Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Draft Ballot re: participation of
standards-setting,
> auditing, and regulatory body representatives
> 
> On 19/10/12 00:18, Ben Wilson wrote:
> > Because the potential for abuse of IPR held by standards bodies and
> > regulatory bodies is substantially less than when that IPR is held
by
> > competitors?
> 
> But, depending on how the standards body is constituted, the person
> representing the body may also be an employee of a competitor.
> 
> To take an example: if Tim Moses ends up chairing this
standards-setting
> working group thing (I forget the name exactly), then he could apply
for
> non-IPR-signing observer/contributor status as a representative of it.
> But he works for Entrust.
> 
> One could say "well, then people should object and we'll have a vote
on
> it", but the options are still only "exclude him" or "let him in
without
> signing the IPR". "Make him sign the IPR" doesn't seem to be an option
> via this procedure.
> 
> Perhaps we could add a clause "no-one may become an observer under
> this procedure if they have a financial relationship with an
organization
> which qualifies for membership in the CAB Forum as a CA or Browser",
or
> words to that effect.
> 
> Gerv
> _______________________________________________
> Public mailing list
> Public at cabforum.org
> https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5246 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20121019/0239e0f4/attachment.bin 


More information about the Public mailing list