Re: [802SEC] UL and 802 policy about restriction notices ine-mails.
Consider my suggestion withdrawn!
Best regards,
Robert D. Love
President, Resilient Packet Ring Alliance
President, LAN Connect Consultants
7105 Leveret Circle Raleigh, NC 27615
Phone: 919 848-6773 Mobile: 919 810-7816
email: rdlove@ieee.org Fax: 208 978-1187
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Quackenbush" <billq@attglobal.net>
Cc: <stds-802-sec@ieee.org>
Sent: Sunday, July 21, 2002 3:14 PM
Subject: Re: [802SEC] UL and 802 policy about restriction notices ine-mails.
>
> All,
>
> I agree with Geoff and Tony.
>
> Any entity could add a statement to a communation that any restrictive
> text in the communication is to be ignored regardless of whether that
> was acceptable to or the desire of the original sender. The addition of
> "cancelling" text is in general not credible.
>
> Regards,
>
> wlq
>
> Tony Jeffree wrote:
> >
> > Geoff -
> >
> > I agree with your analysis - it is not a smart move to accept assertions
of
> > the form "The following assertion should be ignored". There are
sufficient
> > other options (use other Email service, push back on corporate
> > policy...etc) that this kind of approach is unnecessary anyway.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Tony
> >
> > At 07:47 21/07/2002 -0700, Geoff Thompson wrote:
> >
> > >Bob-
> > >
> > >My answer to your question would be that my vote would be no.
> > >The approach that we should take to text within a correspondence that
is
> > >internally contradictory should be towards the conservative. That would
> > >take us in the other direction from where you want to go.
> > >
> > >We could easily get into a situation following your suggestion where an
> > >employer would assert that their employee had not right to make the
> > >assertion and that the corporate text was prevailing.
> > >
> > >We should not go there.
> > >
> > >Geoff
> > >
> > >
> > >At 08:26 PM 7/20/02 -0400, Robert D. Love wrote:
> > >>I have one additional comment on possible wording concerning
gratuitous
> > >>"Confidential Notices" at the end of emails.
> > >>
> > >>Could we allow the email author to include directly above such a
comment a
> > >>notice to ignore the posted "Confidential Notice" as not applying to
this
> > >>email. That may provide people with a way to post emails from their
work
> > >>address while they are still negotiating with their employer to find a
way
> > >>to remove the notice from their outgoing mail to 802 reflectors.
> > >>
> > >>Best regards,
> > >>
> > >>Robert D. Love
> > >>President, Resilient Packet Ring Alliance
> > >>President, LAN Connect Consultants
> > >>7105 Leveret Circle Raleigh, NC 27615
> > >>Phone: 919 848-6773 Mobile: 919 810-7816
> > >>email: rdlove@ieee.org Fax: 208 978-1187
> > >>----- Original Message -----
> > >>From: "Roger B. Marks" <r.b.marks@ieee.org>
> > >>To: "Geoff Thompson" <gthompso@nortelnetworks.com>
> > >>Cc: <stds-802-sec@ieee.org>
> > >>Sent: Friday, July 19, 2002 5:10 PM
> > >>Subject: Re: [802SEC] UL and 802 policy about restriction notices in
> > >>e-mails.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> >
> > >> > Geoff,
> > >> >
> > >> > I like everything you propose, but I have some comments on the last
> > >>paragraph.
> > >> >
> > >> > >Copyrighted works may be accepted as submissions for inclusions in
drafts
> > >>only with an appropriate release.
> > >> >
> > >> > My concern is that we need to have some kind of copyright release
for
> > >>_all_ submissions. Even if a work is not explicitly copyrighted (by,
for
> > >>example, some publisher), the author may own rights to it that could
> > >>possibly cause us some trouble.
> > >> >
> > >> > I adapted this release notice, which is on the 802.16 contribution
cover
> > >>sheet template, from the TIA statement:
> > >> >
> > >> > "The contributor grants a free, irrevocable license to the IEEE to
> > >>incorporate text contained in this contribution, and any modifications
> > >>thereof, in the creation of an IEEE Standards publication; to
copyright in
> > >>the IEEE's name any IEEE Standards publication even though it may
include
> > >>portions of this contribution; and at the IEEE's sole discretion to
permit
> > >>others to reproduce in whole or in part the resulting IEEE Standards
publica
> > >>tion. The contributor also acknowledges and accepts that this
contribution
> > >>may be made public by IEEE 802.16."
> > >> >
> > >> > >Copyrighted works may be referenced in drafts and presentations if
they
> > >>are available on reasonable and non-discriminatory terms.
> > >> >
> > >> > I think we should defer to the IEEE-SA policy and language on this.
If we
> > >>embed specific language into our rules, we may find ourselves out of
sync.
> > >> >
> > >> > Roger
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > >Folks-
> > >> > >
> > >> > >I just got off of the phone with John Verscaj, Vice President and
General
> > >>Counsel of Underwriters Labs. He (effectively) said he understands our
> > >>position and will not oppose it further. He is investigating options
with
> > >>the IT Department of UL and with the upper management of UL that will
solve
> > >>the problem at the UL end. The current situation is that (as far as he
> > >>knows) the "Internet E-mail Confidentiality Disclaimer" is
automatically
> > >>appended to all external e-mails as they leave UL.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >Until he gets that problem solved I suggested that UL could
correspond
> > >>with us via fax, postal mail or an outside e-mail account. I said that
we
> > >>would respond promptly and were happy to work with them.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >So, as far as I am concerned, this is no longer a priority issue.
This
> > >>episode does point out that it would be useful to have relevant text
in our
> > >>P&P. To that end (as promised earlier), I would like to put the
following
> > >>text in as a proposed addition to the IEEE Project 802 Operating
Rules. As
> > >>an interested party and voting member of 802.3, I would also propose
the
> > >>same text for adoption in 802.3, to be removed upon adoption by 802.
This is
> > >>only because the adoption track for non-controversial issues in 802.3
is
> > >>faster.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >Bob O'Hara, please put me down for a November Monday agenda item
to
> > >>propose the following addition to the Operating Rules:
> > >> > >
> > >> > >(We currently have no "Procedure" for how to achieve "openness" in
our
> > >>meetings. I think this is a start on the more general topic. I believe
that
> > >>the text is an accurate representation of our long standing policy.)
> > >> > >
> > >> > >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >> > >
> > >> > >(Proposed documentation of existing) 802 Policy regarding
restrictive
> > >>notices
> > >> > >
> > >> > >IEEE 802 operates in an open manner. To that end, no material
submitted
> > >>to IEEE 802, or any of its sub-groups, will be accepted or considered
if
> > >>that material contains any statement that places any burden on the
> > >>recipient(s) with respect to confidentiality or copyright. This policy
> > >>specifically includes e-mail.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >Any material that has such a "Confidentiality Disclaimer" on it is
not
> > >>acceptable. The purpose of such a disclaimer is to transfer some level
of
> > >>responsibility to the recipient for deciding whether or not it is
> > >>appropriate to disclose, use, disseminate, copy, post or otherwise
> > >>distribute, the material.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >IEEE 802 accepts no such responsibility.
> > >> > >The most effective way for 802 to decline any such responsibility
is to
> > >>not accept material with such a disclaimer.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >Correspondence with 802 groups will not be confidential. It is
very
> > >>likely that any such correspondence (in addition to being discussed in
open
> > >>meetings) will be posted in the open portion of our web-site and thus
will
> > >>be disclosed, disseminated and distributed. Anyone who wishes to
correspond
> > >>with an 802 group must understand and accept this as a condition of
sending
> > >>us any documentation. Inclusion of any restrictive notice is contrary
to,
> > >>and negates, any indication of acceptance of the IEEE 802 policy of
> > >>openness.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >Copyrighted works may be accepted as submissions for inclusions in
drafts
> > >>only with an appropriate release. Copyrighted works may be referenced
in
> > >>drafts and presentations if they are available on reasonable and
> > >>non-discriminatory terms.
> > >> > >---------------------------------------------------
> > >> > >
> > >> > >Best regards,
> > >> > >
> > >> > >Geoff
> > >> > >
> > >> > >|=========================================|
> > >> > >| Geoffrey O. Thompson |
> > >> > >| Vice Chair, IEEE 802 |
> > >> > >| Nortel Networks, Inc. M/S: P79/06/B04 |
> > >> > >| 4655 Great America Parkway |
> > >> > >| P. O. Box 58185 |
> > >> > >| Santa Clara, CA 95052-8185 USA |
> > >> > >| Phone: +1 408 495 1339 |
> > >> > >| Fax: +1 408 495 5615 |
> > >> > >| E-Mail: thompson@ieee.org |
> > >> > >| Please see the IEEE 802 web page at |
> > >> > >| http://www.ieee802.org/
> > >> >
> > >
> >
> > Regards,
> > Tony