On 16/1/09 14:40, Ian G wrote:
https://wiki.mozilla.org/CA:Dispute_resolution
....
Which immediately raises the question: why is this important?
It's important to understand why a slightly more formal and documented
approach to dispute resolution is a useful and valuable direction for
all of us.
First the recent history, as a context: In the past month we saw a
series of events (4 to my counting) that brought to the forefront the
potential for trouble. During those events, some people may have
crossed the line, as far as legal and commercial and ethical behaviour went.
My point here is not to name names, or point the finger, and indeed, we
can all recognise that this will just result in counter-naming and
counter-fingering. Which is just lost efficiency.
My point is this: Crossing the line means more loss of efficiency and
more trouble. The former wheel spinning and distractions we can all
appreciate ... but let me just mention the latter. If someone crosses
the line in terms of legal behaviour, *and* a court case happens, this
will be very expensive for them, because they will have to pay the fees
as the respective attorneys battle it out [1].
So, back to efficiency. It is very useful for all here and for Mozilla
to reduce the loss of efficiency. One way we can do this is to clearly
channel disputes and set-up the rules by which the flaws can be opened
up and dealt with. That is, if you act in the way described HERE, then
you are in a dispute and you have to take it seriously. Follow the
rules HERE. You can name names, list flaws and bugs, etc, but do it HERE.
(Then, if you are not in a dispute, then you should follow the normal
rules found elsewhere in the rest of society, which deals with any
questions in its own way.)
That is, to a certain extent, we create a forum where names can be
named, flaws can be written about, and the participants will get a
certain degree of protection. Do it elsewhere, outside, and you get no
protection. When you go into court, your defence [2] is that "Mozilla
procedure for making these forms of complaints is HERE. That's what I did."
Finally, it is also worth pointing out that this applies as much to
Mozilla as anyone else. Consider the policy which states that Mozo can
e.g., drop the root. If Mozo were to go ahead and drop a root, without
a relatively clear procedure for that, then I would speculate [3] it
would have trouble surviving a challenge in court. However, if Mozo has
the right (in policy) and the procedure (that new page) and follows the
procedure (in bugzilla) then it is in a much stronger position.
iang
[1] this is generally true regardless of the merits. The love of
lawyers is the most expensive thing you will ever pay for in your life!
[2] This is not a complete defence, of course. Let's not get distracted
on binary defences, they don't exist.
[3] see thread "dropping the root is useless" and other popular hits of
2008 :)
http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.dev.tech.crypto/browse_thread/thread/45e488d613080d71
_______________________________________________
dev-tech-crypto mailing list
dev-tech-crypto@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-crypto
