Your process seems fine to me, however, does it have any advantage compared to having ietf-ipr@xxxxxxxx be a moderated mailing list, run under the same rules as any other IETF mailing list? We already have processes to deal with spam, moderation, DoS attacks, and even appeal paths. You can easily sign patent licenses with OpenPGP/MIME or S/MIME in e-mail as well. As far as I can tell, an IETF mailing list would have the same properties as your proposal, or is there any difference? A mailing list sounds easier to manage to me, compared to inventing a new process that effectively have the same properties. /Simon Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@xxxxxxxx> writes: > It seems like there is a lot of concern about removals, and some > concern about original publication of spam, drivel, and duplicate > notices. Here is a proposal for a way forward: > > 1) Original submissions to the IPR repository are moderated, but only > to prevent publication of spam and drivel. If the moderator (who > should probably be a NomCom-appointed person such as the IETF chair or > IAB chair) sees what appears to be a duplicate notice, that person can > ask the poster if they really meant to publish the duplicate notice; > if so, it gets published. > > 2) Once published, a notice is never removed. A notice can, however, > later be amended. Amendments are attached to the published notice. > > 3) All amendments that the moderator considers to come from the > original poster or from the likely owner of the IPR in the posting are > accepted. > > 4) Other amendments are moderated. The moderator should (other than in > cases of spam or drivel) either post a relevant amendment or suggest > to the amendment's proposer that the proposer file a different IPR > statement that cross-references this on. > > 5) In case of dispute about posting an amendment, the moderator should > make his/her own amendment summarizing the dispute. > > These are fairly easy to follow and give latitude to the > moderator. Concerns about censorship or incompetence on the part of > the moderator are dealt with fairly easily: the aggrieved party can > send mail to the IETF mailing list. > > Thoughts? > > --Paul Hoffman, Director > --VPN Consortium _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf