So then Ted are you formally saying that it is inappropriate to discuss IETF operations or its processes on the IETF@xxxxxxxx mailing list? The problem with the IPR working group is simply that Harald kicks people off for disagreeing with him or his very limited charter. He doesn't want to hear about expanding the charter or how these other issues fit into the IPR Working Group and in doing so he is violating my and others participatory rights as well as our First Amendment rights I believe too. Todd Glassey. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Theodore Tso" <tytso@xxxxxxx> To: "todd glassey" <tglassey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Cc: "Brian E Carpenter" <brc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <ietf@xxxxxxxx>; <nea@xxxxxxxx> Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 2:25 PM Subject: Re: [Nea] WG Review: Network Endpoint Assessment (nea) > On Mon, Oct 09, 2006 at 01:54:51PM -0700, todd glassey wrote: > > No you are wrong Ted, and its pretty funny too. As it happens you are > > incorrect for saying that this is inappropriate for the IETF's lists. > > > > You need to dig farther into the WIPO Site and find all the State Signatures > > to the Treaties - its them that the IETF is bound by whether it likes it or > > not. Since the countries through with the IETF's actions operate including > > the meetings, are all signatories to the WIPO Treaties you are exactly stuck > > with them. > > I said it was inappropraite for the IETF list. If you have specific > ideas as they relate to the ipr working group, feel free to be > specific about specific WIPO treaties that have resulted in national > legislation, and specific changes to be made to IETF's IPR policies, > feel free to make them on that list, but not on the main IETF list, > please. > > Thanks, > > - Ted _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf