bwilson at mozilla.com
Wed Aug 16 19:45:14 UTC 2023
and collapsing that concept into "Subscriber Agreement" there are places
where "agreeing" and "legally binding" may get watered down. "Agree" is
replaced with "accept" in some places, and in two places "legally binding"
is preserved for unaffiliated parties but not between affiliates (line 3364
and line 3380), but I don't think that make the proposed language less
That being said, we could expand the scope of the ballot to address other
"Subscriber Agreement" issues, if anyone can articulate them and present
acceptable language that would address them.
Dustin Hollenback is the proposer of this ballot, so he may have additional
points he'd like to make or clarify.
On Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 12:29 PM Clint Wilson <clintw at apple.com> wrote:
> Hi Ben,
> As I understand it the goal of these changes is just to simplify the terms
> used in the BRs — and, as has been brought up separately, potentially other
> CA/BF Final Guidelines — in order to enable collapsing their use of “Terms
> of Use” into the concept of the “Subscriber Agreement”. Is that an accurate
> description of the intent of this draft? Are there any other goals or
> outcomes being aimed at with these changes?
> On Aug 14, 2023, at 12:40 PM, Ben Wilson via Servercert-wg <
> servercert-wg at cabforum.org> wrote:
> Dustin Hollenback and I are looking for another endorser for a proposed
> ballot - see
> with "Subscriber Agreement" and make several other changes with respect to
> "Subscriber Agreements".
> Is anyone interested in endorsing?
> Servercert-wg mailing list
> Servercert-wg at cabforum.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Servercert-wg