[cabfpub] cabfpub] Bylaws: Add Forum Subcommittees

[Wayne Thayer]

Kirk - I agree with your arguments that my proposed language is too broad
but I also think that yours is a bit too narrow. How about:

“Due to the lack of IPR protection, Subcommittees of the Forum shall not
engage in activities that carry a significant risk of introducing
encumbered intellectual property, such as the development or amendment of
Guidelines.”

- Wayne

On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 11:25 AM Kirk Hall <Kirk.Hall at entrustdatacard.com>
wrote:

> Wayne – as I said on the call, I think the restriction should be
> narrower.  Something like “In order to avoid coming within the scope of
> the IPR Agreement , the Forum and its Subcommittees shall not engage in
> the development or amendment of Guidelines.”
>
>
>
> The draft language you have below is almost impossible to apply – “any
> activity that could result in a claim infringement of a Member's
> Intellectual Property”.  If we discuss a draft Charter at the Forum level
> for creation of a new Anti-Gravity Certificate Working Group and we want to
> fine-tune the WG’s scope, we will certainly be discussing technical
> issues.  How can we possibly know whether or not our discussion “could
> result in a claim infringement of a Member's Intellectual Property”?  I
> have no idea what Intellectual Property the other Members have.
>
>
>
> As another example, the Infrastructure WG may forward a proposal to the
> Forum for how we do our wiki, emails, etc., and ask for comments.  I’m sure
> that several Members have IP relating to wikis, servers, email systems,
> etc.  If we discuss the WG proposal at the Forum level, would that be an
> “activity that could result in a claim infringement of a Member's
> Intellectual Property”?  No, because the Forum will not be drafting
> Guidelines, and is not a WG.
>
>
>
> We need to keep focused on the language of the IPRA and what it covers –
> which is only development of Guidelines at the WG level.  So long as the
> Forum (and its subcommittees) stays away from that, we should be good.
>
>
>
> *From:* Public [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org] *On Behalf Of *Wayne
> Thayer via Public
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 24, 2019 9:38 AM
> *To:* CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public at cabforum.org>
> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL][cabfpub] Bylaws: Add Forum Subcommittees
>
>
>
> On today's call, we discussed the addition of the following section to the
> Bylaws:
>
> 5.6    Subcommittees
> The Forum may establish subcommittees of the Forum by ballot to address
> any of the Forum’s business as specified in the ballot. Subcommittees are
> open to all Forum Members. A Forum Subcommittee may work on and recommend
> Forum ballots, complete delegated Forum functions, or issue reports to the
> Forum that are within the subcommittee’s jurisdiction. Subcommittees must
> post all agendas and minutes on a public mail list.
>
>
>
> Ryan proposed the addition of explicit language regarding IPR. Something
> like:
>
>
>
> Subcommittees of the Forum shall not engage in any activity that could
> result in a claim infringement of a Member's Intellectual Property. Such
> activities include the discussion or creation of Guidelines or similar
> standards-setting documents.
>
>
>
> Comments?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Wayne
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20190206/ab9b6fbc/attachment-0002.html>