[MPEG-OTSPEC] To Young-Kwon Lim & Gary Sullivan & others

Fri Sep 25 01:59:12 CEST 2020

Hi Behdad, Vlad and all,

As Behdad mentioned, having a private conversation is nothing wrong. And 
the results of the private conversation does not have to be shared with 
the AHG members if they have decided to so.

Please be advised the relationship between the AHGs and MPEG and the 
procedures. As the AHGs are a venue to discuss any issues related to 
MPEG standards with industry experts including both MPEG members and 
non-members, the discussion cannot/does not have to be reflected to any 
standards work unless there are 1) recommendations by the AHG for MPEG 
to do something and/or 2)any contributions to MPEG is made by the member 
of AHG referencing the consensus of the AHG.  In addition, AHG is not 
supposed to discuss about what happened inside MPEG during the standard 
development process. MPEG members participating the AHG can share some 
technical decision to AHG members if they are related to the mandates 
and officially made public by MPEG. The contributions cannot be shared 
with the AHG members without agreement with the original authors and the 
output documents cannot be share with the AHG members if they are not 
recommended to be made public by MPEG. So, non-MPEG members 
participating the AHGs may not have access to some information but the 
chair of an AHG does not have any power to share the information beyond 
what is allowed by MPEG. The members of the AHG can ask the chair of an 
AHG to recommend MPEG to make some information to be public so that the 
AHG members can access such information as needed.

Sincerely,
Young

------ Original Message ------
From: "Behdad Esfahbod" <behdad at behdad.org>
To: "Levantovsky, Vladimir" <Vladimir.Levantovsky at monotype.com>
Cc: "Youngkwon Lim" <yklwhite at gmail.com>; "mpeg-otspec" 
<mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at>
Sent: 09/24/20 14:21:04
Subject: Re: [MPEG-OTSPEC] To Young-Kwon Lim & Gary Sullivan & others

>On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 1:17 PM Levantovsky, Vladimir 
><Vladimir.Levantovsky at monotype.com> wrote:
>>Behdad,
>>
>>
>>
>>At ~1:19:00 into your recorded video, you are making a false claim 
>>about Peter and I having a long private conversation where you are 
>>alleging that a secretive discussion took place for which an outcome 
>>is not known.
>>
>
>You told me directly on video call last month. You said you had a long 
>conversation with him. If you meant that was on the list, then I didn't 
>realize that.
>
>Are you saying that you didn't have a private conversation with Peter 
>in that time period?
>
>At any rate, this specific detail is not important to the story. Having 
>private conversations is not wrong by itself.
>
>>The is a misrepresentation of the facts, and, this time, it appears 
>>that your misrepresentation of the facts is deliberate!
>>
>>
>>
>>If you have such a clear recollection of the events that happened in 
>>February 2016, when Peter sent his somewhat misguided email (that seem 
>>to have aggravated you so much, even though it was addressed to me, 
>>not you), if you remembered all the minute details of the 
>>conversations that happened at that time - you are undoubtedly aware 
>>that your allegations of Peter and I having a private and secretive 
>>meeting are totally false, and that the conversation actually happened 
>>in public, out in the open, and over email – neither in person nor 
>>behind the closed doors, as you allege!
>>
>>https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/2016-February/000674.html
>>
>>
>>
>>Let me quote specific parts of my email response to Peter that you 
>>seem to have forgotten about, I hope these particular passages would 
>>put you concerns at ease:
>>
>>“The reality of ISO process is that *all* interested parties are given equal opportunities to propose, discuss and object to new features and everybody is treated equally and with respect.”
>>
>>“Yes, OFF originated as Microsoft and Adobe contribution to the ISO. However, as the established ISO standard, it is now subject to ISO process and policies that, among others, require equal opportunities being given to every participant - experts from Adobe, Apple, Google, Microsoft, Monotype and many individual experts are all members of the ISO ad-hoc group (as you can see from the group membership list) are represented there. You are free to innovate and experiment and introduce new ideas in your platform implementation but new ideas can also be contributed by people who have no association with Microsoft. This is why having an open, industry-wide forum that is dedicated to discussing new proposals and, ultimately, after proper review and consideration is given, making them part of the ISO standard is so important!”
>>
>>As you can see, the original email from Peter was sent on Saturday, 
>>Feb. 13, 2016, and the issue was resolved the very next day – on 
>>Sunday Feb. 14th. If there ever was an attempt to “assert dominance” 
>>as you were alleging, that dominance didn’t survive for much longer 
>>than one fateful weekend!
>>
>>
>>
>>You are also making allegations that since that fateful secret private 
>>meeting [that never took place] “nothing went into the Open Font 
>>Format without Microsoft approval”. At 1:19:30 into your recorded 
>>video, you are saying that after this email [from Peter] “the Open 
>>Font Format contribution pipeline was completely clogged, controlled 
>>by Microsoft”!
>>
>>
>>
>>I am truly puzzled by this yet another demonstrably false 
>>misrepresentation – a cursory glance at the email archive shows active 
>>discussions continued throughout February – May of 2016, with many 
>>participants contributing to the AHG work:
>>
>>https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/2016-February/date.html
>>
>>https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/2016-March/date.html
>>
>>https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/2016-April/date.html
>>
>>https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/2016-May/date.html
>>
>>Apparently, that email didn’t intimidate anyone but you, or so it 
>>seems.
>>
>>
>>
>>More so, at 2:12:50, your presentation includes another glaring 
>>inaccuracy (to put it politely) stating that “Vlad never commented on 
>>Peter’s [email] reserving veto power …, no one confronted him …” – I 
>>am flabbergasted how such a long, confrontational email I wrote in 
>>response to Peter (see link above) could possibly escape your watchful 
>>eye? So, since you’ve made your sanctimonious claim that OFF is not a 
>>“legit avenue” you could use, I can’t help but wonder – is there 
>>anything legit about your complaint?
>>
>>
>>
>>At 2:45:55, you offer a recount of our conversations earlier this 
>>year. You claim that as a major innovator in this space you’ve been 
>>blocked [allegedly, by me] to contribute to this AHG for the last 10 
>>years. You’re saying that “the AHG doesn’t work for me, it has blocked 
>>me from innovating for the last 4 years”. Another cursory glance into 
>>the AHG email archive (https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/) 
>>shows that you’ve been a participant in the work of the AHG at least 
>>since January 2010, contributing 46 times up until April 2018 (yes, I 
>>counted). You are accusing me of blocking your complaint, while 
>>conveniently omitting the fact that you never offered your answer to 
>>my one simple question to substantiate any of your claims – your only 
>>response was “I am tired of any explanations!”.
>>
>>
>>
>>During the last couple of months, you made quite a few allegations 
>>that were proven demonstrably not true, and I am yet waiting to see at 
>>least one that can be backed up by supporting evidence. At 2:55:30 in 
>>your video, you are saying that you said you lost all respect for me 
>>when replying to my message where I ‘touted’ the AHG success yet again 
>>… however, the reality appears to be somewhat different – you “lost a 
>>lot of respect for me” 
>>(https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/2020-August/001965.html) 
>>after I sent an email message pointing out some major inconsistencies 
>>in your recount of the events of 2016. Overall, I find your summary of 
>>our conversations to be veracity-challenged, but that’s on you!
>>
>>
>>
>>I’ve heard you, but I do not agree with you – for all the reasons 
>>stated above.
>>
>>Vladimir
>>
>>
>>
>>P.S. You’ve been making numerous claims of impropriety, insulting 
>>people publicly and attacking their character and motives, demanding 
>>other people to apologize to you … Has it ever occurred to you that it 
>>may be you who owes an apology to Sairus, Alan, Peter, and many other 
>>people you insulted in passing by your public posts? Your conduct in 
>>this AHG and on many public forums is offensive and disrespectful, but 
>>again – that’s on you!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>From: mpeg-otspec <mpeg-otspec-bounces at lists.aau.at> On Behalf Of 
>>Behdad Esfahbod
>>Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2020 8:20 PM
>>To: Youngkwon Lim <yklwhite at gmail.com>
>>Cc: mpeg-otspec <mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at>
>>Subject: Re: [MPEG-OTSPEC] To Young-Kwon Lim & Gary Sullivan & others
>>
>>
>>
>>Hi Young,
>>
>>
>>
>>Thank you for your response. I know it's a lot to ask, but I recorded 
>>the following video today with my grievance:
>>
>>
>>
>>   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vSLkriYBFs 
>><https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/PeorC5yrxRh0MgyBuzxU2P>
>>
>>
>>
>>I would like to invite you to watch that and do as you see 
>>appropriate.
>>
>>
>>
>>Thank you,
>>
>>
>>
>>behdad
>>http://behdad.org/ 
>><https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/mqROC68vyBsoPVR5U6bXtX/>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 4:04 PM Youngkwon Lim <yklwhite at gmail.com> 
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Hello,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>This is Youngkwon Lim, the convenor of ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 29/WG 3 MPEG 
>>>Systems Convenor. As I'm on the reflector as well, you can write to 
>>>the reflector on anything you would like to discuss with me. At this 
>>>point I don't understand the needs for any private communication.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>One thing I would like to remind you is that you should follow ISO 
>>>Code of Conduct while you are participating this AHG or any other 
>>>MPEG activities.  You can find the document from here, 
>>>https://www.iso.org/publication/PUB100397.html 
>>><https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/qtH0C73wzpCmzErDHBINNc>  I'm 
>>>concerned that some comments you have posted and referenced in your 
>>>previous email seems violating it.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>In addition, Gary Sullivan is currently not serving as the Chairman 
>>>of the SC 29 and in any case I don't see anything to report to SC 29 
>>>level yet so you can discuss with me through this reflector first.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Hope to continue productive discussion.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Sincerely,
>>>
>>>Young
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>------ Original Message ------
>>>
>>>From: "Behdad Esfahbod" <behdad at behdad.org>
>>>
>>>To: "mpeg-otspec" <mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at>
>>>
>>>Sent: 09/22/20 16:54:37
>>>
>>>Subject: [MPEG-OTSPEC] To Young-Kwon Lim & Gary Sullivan & others
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hello,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I don't have your email addresses. Can you please reach out to me 
>>>>privately so I can submit my complaint to you when it's ready?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>In the meantime, I like everyone on the list to check what Vlad is 
>>>>doing just now on github:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>https://twitter.com/behdadesfahbod/status/1308524396105969664 
>>>><https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/DE8BC82xAMhjXOmoCMhnX_>
>>>>
>>>>https://github.com/MPEGGroup/OpenFontFormat/issues/1 
>>>><https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/LeRvC9ryBDhmzRJGHPgVdR>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>behdad
>>>>http://behdad.org/ 
>>>><https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/mqROC68vyBsoPVR5U6bXtX/>
>>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/attachments/20200924/c2f6a1f2/attachment-0001.html>