On Jul 14, 2011, at 6:24 AM, Dave CROCKER wrote: > > > On 7/12/2011 2:36 PM, Jorge Contreras wrote: >> You may want to refer to Section 5.2 of RFC 5378, which addresses this issue: >> >> "Each Contributor agrees that any statement in a Contribution, whether >> generated >> automatically or otherwise, that states or implies that the Contribution is >> confidential or subject to any privilege, can be disregarded for all >> purposes, >> and will be of no force or effect." > > > Jorge, > > It's excellent that the issue was covered in the RFC. > > My question is how the contents of that RFC can be binding on random IETF > participants?
Everyone on this list has be asked to and has accepted the note well. > I doubt many folk even know about the item, even if they know about the RFC > and I don't see how they have agreed to those terms. http://www.ietf.org/about/note-well.html > Has the force of this been tested? That is, when there is a conflict between > the conditions imposed by one of these email attachments and the terms in RFC > 5378, is there equivalent legal precedent for the RFC to win? > > Thanks. > > d/ > > -- > > Dave Crocker > Brandenburg InternetWorking > bbiw.net > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
