At 12:43 PM 3/20/2015, Nico Williams wrote: >> If its also (or only) a "legal" issue, we direct the affected >> participants to engage elsewhere and keep our mitts out of that part >> of it. > >Yes. And, of course, if such law purports to bind the IETF to have a >role in enforcing it, then the IETF must consider it, for the obvious >reason that not doing so may incur liability in/as to that locality. I >think this was part of the intent, and there's nothing wrong with that. I've been looking for such a law. In many jurisdictions. I've been unable to find one. All of the similar laws have a tighter nexus - e.g. workplace harassment has a nexus with an employer. The IETF isn't (mostly) the employer of the attendees or participants. The other SDO's actually have to create a nexus between themselves and their participants with respect to harassment (look at the membership agreements) wherein the members consent to jurisdiction and that doesn't actually create a duty in law for the SDO past that stated in the membership agreement AFAICT. We don't actually have members in the legal sense so its hard to find a nexus where the IETF has a duty in law past those that any organization that holds an in-person meetings would have (e.g. safety issues mostly). Later, Mike ps - the closest thing to the above that I've found that's not related to employment are the mandated reporter laws related to child neglect and abuse. What I've been looking specifically where a third party (e.g the IETF in this case) is responsible for policing the non-physical interactions between two individuals. Can any one point to a specific law that is NOT employer/employee related?