--On Sunday, August 04, 2013 19:31 + Ted Lemon
ted.le...@nominum.com wrote:
If you came to the IETF and were working for company X,
registered pseudonymously, and didn't disclose IPR belonging
to you or company X, and then later company X sued someone for
using their IPR, you and
On Aug 3, 2013, at 10:23 PM, Yoav Nir y...@checkpoint.com wrote:
The participation in the IETF is already pseudonymous. I have a driver's
license, a passport, and a national ID card, all proving that my name is
indeed Yoav Nir. But I have never been asked to present any of them at the
IETF.
On Aug 4, 2013, at 9:09 PM, Ted Lemon ted.le...@nominum.com wrote:
On Aug 3, 2013, at 10:23 PM, Yoav Nir y...@checkpoint.com wrote:
The participation in the IETF is already pseudonymous. I have a driver's
license, a passport, and a national ID card, all proving that my name is
indeed Yoav
On Aug 4, 2013, at 3:06 PM, Yoav Nir y...@checkpoint.com wrote:
No, I use a credit card in the name of my company's head of purchasing, so
not in my name.
Why wouldn't that be sufficient to identify you? Is the head of purchasing
going to protect your anonymity?
I would never lie at
Hi Adam,
I don't agree with you. I am a remote participant (2 years and never
attended meetings) in the IETF organisation, do you think that IETF is
fare in treating remote participants? I think the current IETF
direction is in favor of attended-meeting participants, so IMHO one
reason of some
2 aug 2013 kl. 14:13 skrev Scott Brim scott.b...@gmail.com:
I'm completely against participating anonymously because of IPR issues.
I'm mostly against pseudonymous participation for the same reason. I
need to be able to know who I'm dealing with, in order to know if there
are IPR issues
AB, saving your entire message for context ... You're fixing the wrong
problem. The problem is not finding a way to cloak so some unspecified
person doesn't experience abuse. It's important that we all know who we
are dealing with. The problem, rather, is what is leading you to think
anonymity
/
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Abdussalam
Baryun [abdussalambar...@gmail.com]
Sent: 03 August 2013 07:41
To: Adam Roach
Cc: Olle E. Johansson; ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Anonymity versus Pseudonymity (was Re: [87attendees
On Aug 3, 2013, at 9:49 AM, Olle E. Johansson o...@edvina.net wrote:
2 aug 2013 kl. 14:13 skrev Scott Brim scott.b...@gmail.com:
I'm completely against participating anonymously because of IPR issues.
I'm mostly against pseudonymous participation for the same reason. I
need to be able
Moving to ietf@ietf.org, since I think this is not in any way specific
to Berlin.
On 8/2/13 12:24, Olle E. Johansson wrote:
In rtcweb we have remote participants that prefer anonymity for a number of
reasons.
I'm going to make a broad assumption that the number of reasons all
relate to
I'm completely against participating anonymously because of IPR issues.
I'm mostly against pseudonymous participation for the same reason. I
need to be able to know who I'm dealing with, in order to know if there
are IPR issues that should be brought up.
On 03/08/2013 00:13, Scott Brim wrote:
I'm completely against participating anonymously because of IPR issues.
I'm mostly against pseudonymous participation for the same reason. I
need to be able to know who I'm dealing with, in order to know if there
are IPR issues that should be brought
+1.
On August 2, 2013 1:13:05 PM Scott Brim scott.b...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm completely against participating anonymously because of IPR issues.
I'm mostly against pseudonymous participation for the same reason. I
need to be able to know who I'm dealing with, in order to know if there
are
13 matches
Mail list logo
