[cabfpub] IPR policy and authorial intent

Ryan Sleevi sleevi at google.com
Tue Nov 8 19:07:47 UTC 2016

On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Gervase Markham <gerv at mozilla.org> wrote:

> Given that we will simultaneously be discussing and hopefully before too
> long be voting on some changes to the Bylaws to solve the problem, their
> trust does not have to extend for that long.

You said "hopefully before too long" - but we know how long it takes to get
stuff accomplished in the Forum, especially when some members fail to
understand the significant risks they're introducing, or fail to understand
the issue. Such members can easily monopolize discussion to the point that
the risk extends indefinitely. And when they do, others no doubt feel
urgency created by this prolonged "discussion" - even if it's simply
repeating points that have been discussed ad nauseum for months or even
years - and thus force ballots forward.

The simple answer is the Forum cannot accomplish any further work until we
resolve these issues. This was something that Google had discussed with
Kirk, Dean, and Ben for over half a year now - so these concerns are by no
means new, and have certainly reached a head now that the concerns are
being ignored.

> The CAB Forum is a consensus group, and seems to have managed OK thusfar
> on the basis of expecting people to act reasonably, because they
> generally have. If you have so little trust in your fellow Forum members
> that you think that any tiny chink in the armour will be ruthlessly
> exploited (and that I, Jody and Curt will gleefully go along with it)
> then I'm not sure what to say to you.

Gerv, I hope you realize the distinction between personal feelings and
trust and legal risk. If you don't, I think it shows little faith in me as
well :)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20161108/611e9cc5/attachment-0003.html>

More information about the Public mailing list