Hi,
I'd like to voice my concern with the provisions of Section 10.1 of the
Trust, and respons to the Consensus Call with a voice of dissent to
consensus on the document as it currently stands.
The section of the Trust document that I have some difficulty with is
section 10.1
"10.1 Amendments. Prior to July 1, 2010, this Agreement may be amended only
by unanimous written consent of both of the Settlors and two-thirds of the
Trustees. After July 1, 2010, the Trustees may unilaterally amend the
provisions of this Agreement without the written consent of the Settlors,
except that no amendment shall be made with respect to the requirement that
the Trust be used in furtherance of the Purpose or subject to the
provisions of Sections 2.1 and 9.7."
Having had some experience with similar overriding veto provisions within
the rights of so-called "charter Members' in the first 5 years of ISOC's
history I am naturally anxious that such situations are not repeated, as
they certainly were the cause of considerable contention within ISOC at the
time which placed ISOC itself at some risk of organizational failure in my
personal opinion.
It appears to me that one way to avoid the undue furtherance of what could
be termed historical interests in the IETF's Trust is to reword this
section to the effect that this effective power of veto vested in CNRI and
ISOC be removed. i.e.:
10.1 Amendments. The Trustees may amend the provisions of this Agreement,
except that no amendment shall be made with respect to the requirement that
the Trust be used in furtherance of the Purpose or subject to the
provisions of Sections 2.1 and 9.7.
Accordingly, given this personal perspective on the provisions of this
trust from my own experiences in a related area, I cannot respond
affirmatively to this Consensus Call on the IETF on the document as it
currently stands.
regards,
Geoff Huston
At 09:38 AM 24/11/2005, Leslie Daigle wrote:
Forwarded on behalf of Lucy.
Leslie.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Update: IETF Trust Consensus Call
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 13:15:19 -0800 (PST)
From: Lucy E. Lynch <llynch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: ietf@xxxxxxxx
All -
I would like to extend the Consensus Call on the IETF Trust for one
additional week until December 2nd. Feedback to the IETF list has been
sparse, but there has been some traffic on the IPR-WG list and a few
comments directed to the IAOC. Additional clarification has been
requested on several points related to future Licensing of IPR held by
the IETF Trust and on the exact nature and disposition of both Current
and Historical data as defined in Schedule A.
The combination of IETF 64, WSIS related travel, and the coming US
holiday has made it hard for all three parties to the IETF Trust
(CNRI/ISOC/IAOC) to coordinate our responses on these two issues. We
hope to have clarifying text on the Licensing issue and updates for
the FAQ shortly, and will publish before 12/2/05. Watch this space:
http://koi.uoregon.edu/~iaoc/
Thanks to all who have made comments, and we will keep you posted.
Lucy E. Lynch Academic User Services
Computing Center University of Oregon
llynch @darkwing.uoregon.edu (541) 346-1774
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
IETF-Announce mailing list
IETF-Announce@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf