| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
The statement from IEEE that David read in response is indeed in the minutes. And as such it seems a little out of place without the context of Guido’s motion. Currently, the minutes (after a list of attendees and a note that introductions occurred) simply start with David’s text in the “Agenda” section even though there is no Old Business or New Business later, so a reader who wasn’t present would wonder why the statement was read at all…
John
From: Gil Ohana (gilohana) <00000b67ee67ba19-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, December 4, 2020 7:17 PM
To: PP-DIALOG@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [PP-DIALOG] IEEE SA Standards Board Patent Committee (PatCom) - December 2020 meeting minutes available online
I agree with Don that a motion that failed to attract a second is not a failed motion, it’s a motion that was never made. To Scott’s point, if we go ahead and include a reference to Guido’s non-seconded motion, we would also need to include the full text that David Law read in response.
Best regards,
Gil
From: Gilfillan, Scott L <scott.l.gilfillan@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, December 04, 2020 3:25 PM
To: PP-DIALOG@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [PP-DIALOG] IEEE SA Standards Board Patent Committee (PatCom) - December 2020 meeting minutes available online
I don’t have a position either way, but as an academic exercise, does it matter that the motion, even if it had been seconded, would have been mooted by the BOG statement that PatCom Chair Law was – prior to the meeting - directed to read?
From: Jim Harlan <Jim.Harlan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, December 04, 2020 2:53 PM
To: PP-DIALOG@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [PP-DIALOG] IEEE SA Standards Board Patent Committee (PatCom) - December 2020 meeting minutes available online
I’m sorry Don, but I respectfully disagree under Robert’s Rules of Order, (link, http://www.rulesonline.com/rror-10.htm#60)
60. The Minutes. The record of the proceedings of a deliberative assembly is usually called the Minutes, or the Record, or the Journal. The essentials of the record are as follows: … (f) all the main motions (except such as were withdrawn) and points of order and appeals, whether sustained or lost, and all other motions that were not lost or withdrawn;
A motion made but not seconded is a failed motion that should be minuted. It is not a lost or withdrawn motion.
Thus, I believe the minutes should be amended to read:
“2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
Guido Hiertz proposed adding an agenda item to discuss status re the September 2020 DOJ Business Review Letter to IEEE. His motion failed after not being seconded.
In response, Chair Law made the following statement: ….”
Or something to that effect.
Jim Harlan • Senior Director, Standards & Competition Policy • InterDigital, Inc.
515 C St NE, Washington, DC 20002 • T: +1 202-349-1713 • Jim.Harlan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: Don Wright <don@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, December 4, 2020 4:48 PM
To: PP-DIALOG@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [PP-DIALOG] IEEE SA Standards Board Patent Committee (PatCom) - December 2020 meeting minutes available online
A motion made but not seconded is not consider by the body and is treated as if it was never made. Therefore, it is not recorded in the minutes.
-----
Don Wright, President
Standards Strategies, LLC
10420 Vista Hills Blvd
Louisville, Ky 40291
+1 859-396-7812
VP, IEEE SA Products and Services Innovation
Past President, IEEE Standards Association.
Member, IEEE SA BoG.
Member, IEEE SA CAG.
Member, IEEE-ISTO Board of Directors
Member, IEEE Governance Committee
Past Member, IEEE Board of Directors
Past Chair, IEEE SA Standards Board
Past Chair, INCITS Executive Board
On Dec 4, 2020, at 5:33 PM, Kolakowski, John (Nokia - US) <john.kolakowski@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hello Dave et al.,
I think these minutes are incomplete because they don’t reflect the motion that Guido Hiertz made, in which he proposed adding an agenda item to discuss status re the September 2020 DOJ Business Review Letter to IEEE. His motion failed after not being seconded by another member of PatCom, but shouldn’t the motion and its failure be reflected in the minutes nonetheless for the sake of completeness?
Thanks,
John Kolakowski
From: Dave Ringle <d.ringle@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, December 2, 2020 11:04 AM
To: PP-DIALOG@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [PP-DIALOG] IEEE SA Standards Board Patent Committee (PatCom) - December 2020 meeting minutes available online
The draft 01 December 2020 PatCom meeting minutes are available at https://standards.ieee.org/content/dam/ieee-standards/standards/web/governance/patcom/1220-patcom-meeting-minutes.pdf
Regards,
******************************************************************
David L. Ringle
Director, IEEE-SA Governance
IEEE Standards Association
445 Hoes Lane
Piscataway, NJ 08854-4141 USA
TEL: +1 732 562 3806
FAX: +1 732 875 0524
EMAIL: d.ringle@xxxxxxxx
******************************************************************
To unsubscribe from the PP-DIALOG list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=PP-DIALOG&A=1
To unsubscribe from the PP-DIALOG list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=PP-DIALOG&A=1
To unsubscribe from the PP-DIALOG list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=PP-DIALOG&A=1
To unsubscribe from the PP-DIALOG list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=PP-DIALOG&A=1
To unsubscribe from the PP-DIALOG list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=PP-DIALOG&A=1
To unsubscribe from the PP-DIALOG list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=PP-DIALOG&A=1
To unsubscribe from the PP-DIALOG list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=PP-DIALOG&A=1
To unsubscribe from the PP-DIALOG list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=PP-DIALOG&A=1