[cabfpub] Volunteers needed to serve on a Patent Advisory Group (PAG) for Ballot 182

Ryan Sleevi sleevi at google.com
Tue Jan 3 22:45:12 UTC 2017

On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 2:32 PM, Kirk Hall <Kirk.Hall at entrustdatacard.com>

> I don’t know the answer to all your questions – the only thing we have to
> go on is Sec. 7.1 and 7.3 of the IPR Policy, which I included in my call
> for volunteers.  We can discuss on the first PAG call.

These are critical to resolve as soon as possible, given that voting
concludes on this Ballot on Jan 7.

> I do believe the filing of Exclusion Notices stops a ballot under
> consideration from proceeding to a vote – instead, the proposed ballot is
> submitted to the PAG for its conclusions on how to “resolve the conflict”
> where an Exclusion Notice was filed without offer of a royalty free license.

While you may personally believe this, I don't believe anything in the
Bylaws or the IPR Policy support your belief. I am hoping you could provide
further evidence that the vote is suspended.

Beyond the fundamental argument against the position (which is that the
text does not support it), I will highlight two further passages that would
conflict with your statement, and would otherwise support that voting on
Ballot 182 has officially started, and will not end until Jan 7.

1) The IPR Policy, Section 7.3.2, notes the possibility that "e. The Final
Guideline or Final Maintenance Guideline should be rescinded." - indicating
that it's both possible and anticipated that such claims still are included
in FMGs
2) The Bylaws, Section 2.2, notes that "The CA/Browser Forum shall provide
seven calendar-days for voting, with the deadline clearly communicated via
the members’ electronic mailing list. All voting will take place online via
the members’ electronic mailing list. "

In your notice, submitted November 1, 2016 to the CA/B Forum's Members-Only
list, as chair, you stated that Ballot 182:
Status: Final Guideline
Vote for Approval (7 days) - Dec 31, 2016 to Jan 7, 2016

As such, I would like to state that I believe voting has officially opened
on this Ballot. Any other interpretation seems to fundamentally call into
question whether this Ballot was "a Ballot", and thus introduce questions
about the nature of members' exclusion notices, and as such, would no doubt
result in further IPR issues down the road. It may be that Ballot 182 fails
for lack of Quorum, if insufficient members vote for it, but it would mean
that any reintroduction would need to be accompanied by a similar 60 day
review period.

It may be that members vote No, and the Ballot fails with quorum. In which
case, a future Ballot may be introduced, either amending or replacing the
Guidelines, undergoing the appropriate review period. It may be that such a
ballot waits for the completion of a PAG, it may not be.

In either event, it seems that, come January 7, Ballot 182 MUST be
considered closed for voting. If the Chair disagrees, it would be helpful
to know as soon as possible, to ensure that members are fully informed of
the value and/or risk of their votes.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20170103/e2735b84/attachment-0003.html>

More information about the Public mailing list