Re: [vhdl-200x] Fwd: IEEE Attorney response to "Can P1076 WG discuss external survey results?"

Thanks for checking. I agree that it is better safe than sorry.

-----------
Stephen Bailey
Stephen@srbailey.com

On May 4, 2011, at 2:05 PM, "Jim Lewis" <Jim@synthworks.com> wrote:

> Hi All,
> I consulted with our IEEE liaison who consulted with the
> IEEE legal counsel regarding the presentation of statical
> data within working groups. Below is their response.
>
> The quick answer is the posting externally collected
> statistical data that does not otherwise violate
> IEEE antitrust rules _is ok_.
>
> With this I withdraw my objection to the discussion.
>
> I apologize if I offended anyone. As chair,
> I am responsible to make sure IEEE rules are followed.
> With legal rules like this, it is not always about the
> exact wording that someone uses, but their intent of
> the wording. What they have said at this point gives
> me a fairly good idea of their intent, so I don't expect
> further issues in the future.
>
> If you want to tell me I told you so, please do it
> privately as I don't think the reflector needs that
> kind of traffic volume. :)
>
> Thanks for your patience and to our IEEE liaison for
> getting us the information quickly.
>
> Best Regards,
> Jim
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Attorney response to "Can P1076 WG discuss external survey results?"
> Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 15:14:25 -0400
> From: J.Woolery@ieee.org
> To: Jim Lewis <Jim@synthworks.com>
> CC: Stan Krolikoski <stanleyk@cadence.com>
>
>
>
>
> Hi Jim,
>
> I'm copying the DASC chair, Stan, on my response because I believe the DASC will be interested in this response as well. I will leave it up to you to decide if you would like to communicate this to
> the working group, or if you would like me to send it to the working group.
>
> Below are answers to questions you raised regarding Mentor Graphics survey results that a Mentor employee shared with the P1076 working group. Legal counsel was consulted and provided the following
> comments:
> *
> 1) **Does the IEEE-SA allow presentation of externally prepared statistical data to the working group without review of the IEEE-SA legal counsel?*
>
> ANSWER: Yes, as long as the content of the survey does not include topics the WG is forbidden to discuss per the IEEE antitrust policy.
> *
> 2) Since the information is already published on the working group reflector, how should the group proceed? *
>
> ANSWER: The group can discuss the survey as long as the discussion is compliant with the antitrust policy.
> *
> 3) **General comments about the IEEE antitrust policy regarding surveys:*
>
> · The policy relates to /group/ efforts to gather market information through surveys, and there are reasons why IEEE should be cautious in undertaking such activities. To begin with, they typically
> cost money, and as with any other contract, the IEEE wants to make sure that only authorized personnel make contractual commitments that might bind the IEEE. Second, the group’s participation in a
> survey might involve discussion of competitively sensitive topics, and IEEE wants to make sure that the discussion (and the resulting survey) are legitimate. There are other reasons as well, and the
> point of the policy is to make sure that the IEEE does not blindly stumble into this category of group activity -- not to forbid the activity altogether.
> · If someone else has gathered information and wants to present it to the group, the fact that the information derived from a survey (whether commissioned by that person or bought after-the-fact from
> a third-party vendor) is irrelevant -- as long as it is truly the case that there was no IEEE or WG-as-a-group involvement in the procurement of the survey.
> · At that point, the usual IEEE rules apply, and those rules deal with the content of the discussion. If a speaker wants to discuss proposed pricing of compliant implementations, that will be
> prohibited whether the speaker uses a methodologically rigorous third-party survey or not. The topic is prohibited.
> · The comment that this process favors those who can afford to conduct a survey is not well taken. Those who evaluate the information can give it the weight it deserves (which may or may not include
> the possibility of discounting the survey's weight, because it comes from an interested party and the “other side” does not have the resources to generate a comparable study that might produce
> contrary results).
>
> Best regards,
>
> *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
> Joan Woolery | Senior Program Manager, TPD
> IEEE Standards Association
> phone: +1 732 465 5893 | fax: +1 732 562 1571
> j.woolery@ieee.org | _http://standards.ieee.org_ <http://standards.ieee.org/>
> IEEE - Advancing Technology for Humanity
> *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
>

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.