On 08/02/2014 07:39, Scott Brim wrote: > I'm concerned that any abbreviated form will inadequately represent > the nuances of the full policy, and that if we create a single uniform > abbreviated version that must be shown at f2f meetings, that opens > loopholes. For example, possibly: "Well, yes I agreed to the Note > Well, but then in the meeting they showed a different version that > didn't cover X. I thought that took precedence." > > There are many ways the full Note Well is dealt with at this time, > most of them good. I don't think you'll get more attention paid to the > IPR policy by showing an abbreviated form. Indeed, I suspect that many IETF participants simply shut down their ears as soon as the subject of IPR is mentioned, and click through the Note Well (and through this thread) without reading. For them, the form of words is irrelevant. For the ones who take notice, the form of words is probably irrelevant too, since all forms ultimately lead to the BCP and that's what counts. So if there is a basic problem, it's getting people to pay attention to the topic at all. I would theorise that the people who ignore the topic actually find it rather unpleasant and want it to go away. Brian