www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org from October 2001: by date

Wednesday, 31 October
- Amplie suas vendas 111netcon@ieg.com.br
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> comercial
- Choose 3 Free Lipsticks Offer - While Supplies Last Shop@Manna
- http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-patent-policy-20010816/ Bob Dewey
Tuesday, 30 October
- cool link rixo@mail.de
- Re: OFFER FOR HELP Diana Muir
- Re: Summary of 15-17 October 2001 Patent Policy WG Face-to-Face meeting available Antonio Arauzo
- 21世紀超勁爆生涯講座 taipei7@yam.com
- Re: Summary of 15-17 October 2001 Patent Policy WG Face-to-Face meeting available Daniel Phillips
- Summary of 25 October 2001 Patent Policy WG Teleconference Susan Lesch
- Summary of 15-17 October 2001 Patent Policy WG Face-to-Face meeting available Daniel Weitzner
- Stop Paying For Porn! Join 4 Free Is Here! 27285338 Join4FreeFrenzy@J4F.com
Monday, 29 October
- I oppose the use of patented technology in w3c standards Michael Crawford
- Employment / HR solution Sara@w3.org
- Employment / HR solution Sara@w3.org
- Patent Policy Todd Weiler
- SVENSKA WAYPOINT SIDAN reveal@bredband.net
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> viktor@hot.ee
- Protect your family from cell phone radiation Warning@sar-shield.com
- Re: [OT] Re: MSN blocks non-IE browsers: the real idea with RAND "standards" Jason Antony
Sunday, 28 October
- From: DBBROADCAST DBBROADCAST
- Marketing is the LIFEBLOOD of your Business AYNOC InternetSales7@excite.com
Saturday, 27 October
- Need a Home Loan? Let Us Help! Kevin Anderson
- Your Engineering web site is NOT Being SEEN! Important Message!
Friday, 26 October
- Pre-Approved $5000 Platinum Credit Card ! credit@new-credit-report.com
- PATO: Collective Security In the Age of Software Patents Mark Bucciarelli
- NO, NO, NO! 0liv
- Re: MSN blocks non-IE browsers: the real idea with RAND "standards" Daniel Phillips
- Vous vendez des v�hicules mailing
- [OT] Re: MSN blocks non-IE browsers: the real idea with RAND "standards" Daniel Phillips
- Re: [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> cb105
- Re: MSN blocks non-IE browsers: the real idea with RAND "standards" Jason Antony
- 私生活観察マニュアルとは・・・ adulty@nozo.kk.jp
- hi :o) Linda A. Langden
Thursday, 25 October
- Re: Why I have not spoken personally about the patent policy issue Jason Antony
- Hey, check this out! QB Challenge
- MSN blocks non-IE browsers: the real idea with RAND "standards" Martijn Dekker
- WEB infrastructure and RAND Lowell Harris
- 企業可應用NETSCREEN防火牆建置網路安全連線環境,並使不同服務享受不同頻寬,有效利用ADSL寬頻達成企業虛擬網路連線. ��~��T��@w3.org
- supply silicon metal and magnesium ingots sales@globalsilicon.com
- Mortgage Leads Available! disk343@excite.com
- Re: What is "reasonable" anyway? chuck weinberger
Wednesday, 24 October
- RE: What is "reasonable" anyway? Stern, Richard H.
- Why I have not spoken personally about the patent policy issue Tim Berners-Lee
- What is "reasonable" anyway? Federico Heinz
- Play a hilarious prank call Computerised Prank Calls
- W3C - Self examination time! Blake Courtney
Tuesday, 23 October
- MARKETING MF
- Talking Hand Held Dictionary Translator... Language Teacher, Inc.
- I Oppose the proposed Patent Policy Framework, dated August 16, 2001 Lynn Walton
Monday, 22 October
- Quality conferencing at a low cost longdistance@repia.com
- Re: I don't like it Antonio Arauzo
- ȭ�� ġ�� ~~~ nike@nike.com
Sunday, 21 October
- Fwd: Play a hilarious prank call Brian Fletcher
- Make some extra money using the internet RussSend@aol.com
- I don't like it 依瑪貓
Saturday, 20 October
- Centro de Rehabilitaci�n mental y tratamiento de adicciones. Arlana
Friday, 19 October
- Make A Chunk Of Money Excel In Life
- Start a home business boudha@abacom.com
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> Godefroid Chapelle
- RAND patents Dan Devine
Thursday, 18 October
- UK WEBCAM LIST Darron Callender
- [홍보]유학가격★폭격쎄일★누구나 갈수있는기회!도전하세요!! Youn, Roy
- W3C position on patents / business methods John Skelton
- No To The Patent Policy Joe Morris
- NO TO RAND (even after 11 October!) tim bacon
- **SPECIAL**COMPUTER MEMORY memorytogo@memorytogo4.com
- patent logic S. Vikram
- patent logic S. Vikram
- Make A Chunk Of Money Excel In Life
Wednesday, 3 October
- Against fees Robert Hooton
Monday, 15 October
- Hello, your friend recommended openxxx.net to you friendz@openxxx.net
Wednesday, 17 October
- XenoFORM XenoFORM team.
- RE: W3C Responds Robert Cole
- Re: Patents Antonio Arauzo
- Make A Chunk Of Money Make Money Fast
- Patent Policy Framework draft L D
- Software development / ref:1603 Info
- advice 20 morganmarino241@yahoo.com
- Standards are to be STANDARD by Definition Warren Puckett
- Re: Next steps in W3C Patent Policy process Jason Antony
- Patent Policy for WWW Standards Troy W.
Tuesday, 16 October
- Incorruptible.com News News@incorruptible.com
Wednesday, 17 October
- �� !!! ludmila
Tuesday, 16 October
- Re: Next steps in W3C Patent Policy process Scott Davis
- As suggested in the GNU WEB site.. BODRATO Stefano
- Patents Anders
- Another boring standard letter which I copied and pasted off the EFF site. Adrian Hesketh
- Read your profile.......... :) Mystic Realms
- Mike wanted you to read this. Jim
Monday, 15 October
- Patent Policy Working Group] stalbert
Tuesday, 16 October
- Indikator vashego uspeha!!! ludmila
Monday, 15 October
- Hello, your friend recommended openxxx.net to you friendz@openxxx.net
Sunday, 7 October
- W3C Patent Policy Framework Eric Backus
Monday, 15 October
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> Nobody
- Make Some Money Excel In Life
- Re: Apple comments on the W3C's proposal Simon Brooke
- Science-based design and development Andrey Golokhvastov
- Maximum Email Profits! David Scott (Internet Marketing Expert)
Sunday, 14 October
- Anthrax... No, it's NOT a computer virus! Family Survival News
- Patent Policy Framework Marina Brown
- Earn $50,000 or more in 90 days Chriss@incorruptible.com
- New Patriotic American Bald Eagle Screen Saver - Free shareware version available for download - Newsletter mz John Herron - Eagle Stock Images
- Hello, your friend recommended openxxx.net to you friends@openxxx.net
- Re: Next steps in W3C Patent Policy process Edoardo Dezani
- Re: Next steps in W3C Patent Policy process Daniel J. Weitzner
- Re: Next steps in W3C Patent Policy process Daniel J. Weitzner
- Recent Patent Policy Framework Draft Baba Kofi Weusijana
- (Resend) RAND at W3C would reinforce global inequity Rick Jelliffe
- triggerhappytv butlerboys@cwctv.net
- Re: Next steps in W3C Patent Policy process Jason Antony
- Re: HP's Proposal for Royalty Free W3C Standards BELL,JIM (HP-Cupertino,ex6)
Saturday, 13 October
- Hello, your friend recommended openxxx to you friends@openxxx.net
- Re: don't think so Hans Schulze
- RAND Ivan Thomson
- don't think so allen lackey
- what a sham jeff lackey
- Make A Little Money Excel In Life
- image damage, legitimacy of w3c endangered barbapapa
- Patents = Web only for the RICH john-paul delaney
- WWW.ZELDMAN.COM Vanessa Lintner
- web standards should NOT be patented ! Alexander Sirotkin
- Your free listing @ JabbasPalace.com Jabba@JabbasPalace.com
Friday, 12 October
- Against the new patent policy. Simon White
- Re: Next steps in W3C Patent Policy process Daniel Phillips
- Next steps in W3C Patent Policy process Daniel J. Weitzner
- "AGAINST INSANE RAND POLICY" M Mamoun
- The Social/Political Role of the W3C Brad Herman
- Web standards, W3C and others. derek lane
- Another $0.02 against. Michael Burford (GetRight)
- THIS IS AN AWFUL IDEA LoreWeaver
- No patents or license rights on the web! Jack Martinez
- Patent policy comment hogarth
- Re: HP's Proposal for Royalty Free W3C Standards BELL,JIM (HP-Cupertino,ex6)
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> John Taylor
- www-patentpolicy-comment Randolph Vail
- Patents and standards El-Gayar, Omar
- RAND rdean71@cs.com
- ACTIVADORES BIOL�GICOS PARA ELIMINAR OLORES. �PUBLICIDAD! !PUBLICIDAD�
- I realize this is a bit late... Seairth Jacobs
- RAND IS BAD John Dooley Road Runner
- PC FLORIPA Inform�tica - Tudo para seu computador PC FLORIPA Inform�tica
- Don't do it ! Jean-Yves Delort
- Protect your life ! protect@life-protect.com
- Plese, no RAND!! Marco Maggesi
- Re: A query about RF Chris Lilley
- 10�� 8�� 14:00�ÿ� ��ߴٴϱ�.. ^^v top
- Protect yourself ! info@life-protect.com
- RAND Comments August Zajonc
- asda nepp@df.copm
- asda nepp@df.copm
- Opinion Dominic Ringuet
- Protect yourself ! info@life-protect.com
- Vague definitions involve a vague future. Edward Champion
- Opinion on Patent Policy Framework Working Draft M Birch
- Meta4z.com Website Giveaway! will
- Additional thoughts against RAND (long, rambling, possibly incoherent) Tony Sellers
- Additional thoughts against RAND (short) Tony Sellers
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> Tim Bray
- Re: "RAND" policy Jason Antony
- Re: A query about RF Jason Antony
- RF-only is much better Anant Sahai
- Re: Comment on W3C's proposed (RAND) Patent Policy Jason Antony
- Policy is self-contradictory and could sideline W3C Mark Shewmaker
- What are you, idiots? Jorey Bump
- RAND vs Universal Access; many other loopholes Neal McBurnett
- I'm opposed to the "reasonable and non-discriminatory" (RAND) licensing option John White
- Electronic Frontier Foundation comments Seth David Schoen
- Opposition to RAND Patent Policy Amit Sahai
- Comment on W3C's proposed (RAND) Patent Policy John L. Males
- New T-shirts screenprints with original art Forrest Bass
- Reject the Patent Policy Framework. Brock Frazier
- On the W3C and Openness... Joe Crawford
- Protect yourself ! info@life-protect.com
- Attn: the W3C Jason Antony
- SchemaSoft comments on 16 Aug 2001 W3C Patent Policy Framework Philip Mansfield
- Protect yourself ! info@life-protect.com
- Re: HP's Proposal for Royalty Free W3C Standards Paul H. Smith
- Re: HP's Proposal for Royalty Free W3C Standards BELL,JIM (HP-Cupertino,ex6)
Thursday, 11 October
- Love of w3c vs. Devotion to free software tom@croft.tc
- Uselicensing in W3C standards Mike McCune
- Re: HP's Proposal for Royalty Free W3C Standards BELL,JIM (HP-Cupertino,ex6)
- Recall: Re: HP's Proposal for Royalty Free W3C Standards BELL,JIM (HP-Cupertino,ex6)
- Re: HP's Proposal for Royalty Free W3C Standards BELL,JIM (HP-Cupertino,ex6)
- SoftQuad Software's comments on the patent policy Lauren Wood
- RAND Jon Snader
- Patent Policy Framework draft and RAND weston
- seed corn William Loughborough
- NO royalty on WWW Seung Hyun Kim
- Patent is not standard 서돈키호테
- an extraordinarily bad idea Matthew Walker
- A Comment on the Proposed Patent Policy and the ensuing controversy (reformatted) Paul Levy
- XenoFORM XenoFORM team.
- Patent Policy Disaster Tex Horning
- Royalty-free patents only, please Allen Smith
- Apple Computer's Statement on the Draft W3C Patent Policy Wanda Cox
- A Comment on the Proposed Patent Policy and the ensuing controversy Paul Levy
- Patent Policy Gregory Catalone
- Oppose Patents Mark Bartlett
- RAND Proposals Alex Hogarth
- Comments Patrick Chapman
- RAND considered harmful rand.w3c@bernard-hugueney.org
- Iper1 per l'e-commerce blumoda@tiscalinet.it
- Meta4z.com Website Giveaway! will
- Patent Policy Mark Maloney
- Contribution to W3C consultation Charles Stewart
- Patent Policy Draft nucleus
- Future High Level Functionality Mark Johnson
- Patent Policy Feedback Phillip Fox
- Last day of comments, nothing changed Daniel Phillips
- PATENTS & THE WORLD WIDE WEB Jonathan Bullen
- NO! Ryan Guenther
- RAND bad, RF Good R. Steven Rainwater
- About the patent policy in W3C web standards Luca Saiu
- Proposed RAND Licensing arrangements Wally Pratt
- Re: Don't drown the spirit of generosity. Glenn Randers-Pehrson
- Fatal Weaknesses of the Patent Disclosure Rules: and the Unocal P atent Debacle Peter DiMauro
- Patent Policy Framework draft Nancy Massey
- "RAND" policy Steve Summit
- Request for feedback. David Woodhouse
- Anasil - software network analyzer Anasil
- Hi from Nick of 6 ,fuller ave newdynamic
- Comments on the W3C Patent Policy Framework Michel Debar
- patent policy Tarun Ramakrishna Elankath
- Proposed RAND licensing arrangements Mike Brodbelt
- patents on the web Oz Barron
- Opposition to RAND Proposal Glenn Elliott
- Patent Policy Framework draft Svein Pedersen
- Patented Internet standards are wrong John Hansknecht
- Don't drown the spirit of generosity. Rory Ewins
- Re: Mozilla.org response to the W3C Patent Policy Framework Working Draft Lee T S
Wednesday, 10 October
- Concerned about patent policy Bradley M. Kuhn
Thursday, 11 October
- standards require RF Gemeinnutz@LuftHans.com
- W3C Patent Policy Claire Hitchfield
- What he said Stuart Robertson
- Setting Standards for the On-line Community Tom Worthington
- Listen to OSI and Mozilla Tore Ferner
- The Web is not just for business Chris Rimmer
- My objection to Patent of Internet standards Scottie \
- Comments of Patent policy Marc
- comments Mark Ellis
- Cadastro 944411@yahoo.com
- comments on patent policy Mark Ellis
- Patent policy comment Alisdair Odd
- Freedom is essential for Innovation Ajeet P Velankar
- RAND Proposal Jeff Herrin
- Thanks Jim Conway
- Use of `RAND' patents D. Tweed
- RAND licencing proposal Michael Zajac
- Patent Policy Framework draft linukes@hushmail.com
- Standards should help education Rafael Calvo
- The general public will fight back Rodger L. Finnestead
- open, free standards rob@robnet.com
- RAND considered harmful Steven Pothier
- Objections to RAND Licensing Mode activities Steven W McDougall
- One little voice against Brett Merkey
- No to Unreasonable and Discriminatory Standards Rajendra Shrestha
- OFFER FOR HELP edward mambo
- Patent Policy Framework Comment sdrie
- what are you thinking???? Scott Staab
Wednesday, 10 October
- patent policy Ben van 't Ende
- New public W3 standards involving RAND licensing conditions. m.Lund
- Re: A query about RF Chris Lilley
- in doubt & uncertain J. van Gorkum
- patent policy Joel T Schneider
- opinion on patent policy krista gallagher
- I Oppose RAND tony@nhfpl.org
- "RAND" policy Don
- Opera Software's postion Håkon Wium Lie
- Re: Response to Public Comments on the W3C Patent Policy Framework Working Draft Mike Todd
- Re: Policy Dunn_Bill@emc.com
- Support Open Web Standards Greg Kise
- Apple's RAND licensing, prior art, and the W3C process Neil Harris
- Re: www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org ccooke@indigo.ie
- Patent Policy Comment / Objecting to RAND psevetson@netscape.net
- Subject: "NO" TO RAND LICENSING Bruce Lunde
- Just say no Chip Mefford
- Policy Valden Longhurst
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> Roozbeh Pournader
- Keep the web open and alive Dr. Michael Evans
- WWW Patent Policy makes same mistake as dead dot-coms Joseph Wang
- Patent policy Richard Walker
- Patents = Friction John Medcalf
- RAND direction proposal Alexander Stohr
- petition dpytlewski@idea.net.pl
- Comments on draft Patent Policy Framework Joycelyn Maddux
- Proposed patent policy Greg Ward
- Patent Policy comment Jason L. Gohlke
- Suggestions for alternative procedure David Balch
- RAND: A Bad Thing Peter H.
- Re: [www-patentpolicy-comment] Alek Lynge
- Patents rick@dimensionsinteractive.com
- Don't put your hands in my pourse !!! Nazar
- Branded/Private Label Realtime Internet Travel Booking Engine in Eleven Languages John Hazlewood
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> Ben Wrighton - Wapdesign
- RE: [xml-dev] standards vs. the public Bullard, Claude L (Len)
- open source is open mind Trahojen
- Risks to content (digital rights management) in proposed framework Andy Oram
- Doing a PhD? Mark Coppel
- Applause Glenn Randers-Pehrson
- Patent Policy Mark Plowman
- 500 billion not enough for MS? Jsphrsa@aol.com
- Patent Policy Framework draft Jens Laland
- This is not a good idea Lars Nielsen Lind
- Comments on the proposal Paul Pathiakis
- Comments on the proposal James Green
- No to RAND David Wright
- My disquiet at RAND licenses Rajnish Bhaskar
- wealthocracy corrupting meritocracy - funding strategy proposal Tom Cowap
- Request to extend public comment period Jason Antony
- Re: Mozilla.org response to the W3C Patent Policy Framework Working Draft Jozef Halbersztadt
- Request to extend public comment period Jason Antony
- New Friends From Bermuda!? Bermuda Seek
- I reject a proprietary W3C pressio main
- Since when is the web for sale? Bea Fontaine
- Response to the W3C Patent Policy Framework Policy Draft Robin Peters
- Exclusion Frank Schafer
- patent policy framework draft Austin Brooks
- patented protocols. Michael Mounteney
- I am disappointed Martin Kutschker
- W3C Patent Policy Framework michael
Tuesday, 9 October
- Web Standards NLK
Wednesday, 10 October
- Regarding recent Patent Policy Framework draft Daniel LaBell
- www Power Grab Donald Kleyensteuber
- No RAND in Patent Policy Framework Draft Scott Busby
- Keep the WWW a free zone Philip and Shelia McArdle
- Re: Policy requires definitions, remedies, guarantees Steven Champeon
- Say It Ain't So, Joe Patricia West
- Re: Policy requires definitions, remedies, guarantees Jason Antony
- Re: Policy requires definitions, remedies, guarantees Jason Antony
- No to RAND licensing Carl Douglas
- Comments on RAND in three sections Steven Healey
- Re: OSI letter of comment on W3C's proposed RAND policy TopXML - Mark Wilson
- Mozilla.org response to the W3C Patent Policy Framework Working Draft Christopher Blizzard
Thursday, 11 October
- Looking for Mortgage Leads??? -racbflg thunderbird@jufuceyj.yahoo.com
Wednesday, 10 October
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> Roberto Schulz
- Additional comments to W3C Patent Policy Framework Working Draft Evelio Perez-Albuerne
- About Your Resource webmaster@axxxhome.com
- Nothing to say but "no" Jose Luis Pumarega
Tuesday, 9 October
- Re: OSI letter of comment on W3C's proposed RAND policy Maurice Aubrey
- SEXWEB NO.1 .. MEGAWEB-SEX ! EROTICAWWW
- Re: Policy requires definitions, remedies, guarantees Daniel Phillips
- Re: [xml-dev] standards vs. the public Jonathan Borden
- Reasons not to accept patents into standards Matthew Boulos
- Comments on Patent Policy Draft matthew@toseland.f9.co.uk
- RAND licensing should not be allowed Nathaniel Gray
- Policy requires definitions, remedies, guarantees Jeffrey Zeldman
- so...how much is Microsoft paying you? Robin Shaw
- Web Patents Davi
- No to RAND as it is proposed Marc Verwerft
- Established Standards Eldon King
- Re: Patent Policy Framework draft Anne E. Jablinske
- FW: RAND licensing proposal. Doug Dingus
- RAND Robert Bergesch
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> jose lorenzo
Wednesday, 10 October
- Clear Consequences Matthew C. Tedder
Tuesday, 9 October
- RE: [xml-dev] standards vs. the public Bullard, Claude L (Len)
- Publicity For Less - (Specialty Media Lists Available) PublicityWorks@netscape.net
- patent-response Edward Renaud
- Stay Open Paul Tichonczuk
- Bookstore & Library Databases (400+ New Libraries; 175 New Age Bookstores) PublicityWorks@netscape.net
- Patent Policy draft. John Hornstein
- There Was Once a Vision of a Free Internet Mark Herman II
- RE: [xml-dev] standards vs. the public Bullard, Claude L (Len)
- I object!! Gayle Knutson
- Royalty-free (RF) is the only acceptable 'compromise' Ralph Hyre
- RE: [xml-dev] standards vs. the public Bullard, Claude L (Len)
- Re: [xml-dev] standards vs. the public Jonathan Borden
- Re: [xml-dev] standards vs. the public Jonathan Borden
- Patent Policy Gerard Boissy
- KIO Raymond Pirouz
- RAND objection Bryan Montford
- no patents please Loe, Steven
- OSI letter of comment on W3C's proposed RAND policy Eric S. Raymond
- RE: [xml-dev] standards vs. the public Bullard, Claude L (Len)
- RAND objection Mark Brader
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> Timothy Hinds
- Re: [xml-dev] standards vs. the public Jonathan Borden
- In Response To Proposed Patent Policy cbma
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> Jim Webb
- Anti-Trust Issues of RAND Daniel Probst
- Disappointed Steven.H.Rogers@seagate.com
- RE: [xml-dev] standards vs. the public Bullard, Claude L (Len)
- --- dont quite understand this eddie wilson
- No, no no Cory Shubert
- W3C Patent Policy Jon Slaton
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> Kai Kunze
- W3C standards should be free Asle Benoni
- A Case for Freedom massey
- My thoughts on the Patency Policy draft Glen Scott
- RAND licensing is bad Ted Wright
- Please fax two copies of your promotional literature to 08717171250. phone.08717171249@fax.08717171250
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> Madden, Francis
- Thoughts on your Patent proposal Henrik Jönsson
- World Wide Web Consortium - Patent Policy Working Group wendybrek@mixcom.com
- Human evolution. Manos Batsis
- A query about RF Jason Antony
- A few more comments (this time on the specific wording of the "W3C Patent Policy Framework") Jesper Juhl
Monday, 8 October
- www-patentpolicy-comment James
Tuesday, 9 October
- Comment Voluspa
- Define RAND Pat Mahoney
- Comments on the W3C Patent Policy Framework Bill Zaumen
- RAND: sounds like end of free web software, originator of WWW & W3C Danilo Almeida
- RAND cfb@sol.usc.edu
- If you feel fees must be charged, could a "sliding" scale be used steve and allana
- RAND Licensing is Counterproductive Bill Gunn
- Supporting software patents undermines credibility of W3C Dwayne C. Litzenberger
- Proposed Patent Royalty Policy for WWW Bobgmoss@aol.com
- RAND and Rolalty-Free Licensing Mode James Gartside
- Patent Policy comments Bob McDonald
- Not a good idea Dan Phiffer
Monday, 8 October
- Patent Policy gregory.d.dickson@accenture.com
Tuesday, 9 October
- oppose abuse of patent system to limit web free flow of information paul ih
- Comments on patent Policy Cathy Gage
- About W3C patent policy Murali Mani
- Re: [xml-dev] standards vs. the public Simon St.Laurent
- No Patents LMichelle
Monday, 8 October
- standards vs. the public Steven R. Newcomb
Wednesday, 17 October
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> Oscar Zurita
Monday, 8 October
- Essential Claim question Noble, Lisa
- Comments Jon Wiley
- Open Web! John Abbe
- comments on proposals Lisa Lorenzin
- Eurolinux statement on W3C RAND proposal Stefane Fermigier
- RAND licensing John Carey
- New forums/massage-board. Please join now! this-is-the-shit
- New forums/massage-board. Please join now! this-is-the-shit
- please don't Joe Desbonnet
- patent policy Daniel Webb
- Patents are damage Steven W McDougall
- Royalties Mariner's Loft
- Disagreement with new Patent Policy draft Paul Erickson
- W3C Patent Policy Framework working draft Bob Goates
- Patent Policy Framework Rob Simmons
- DON"T RECOMEND RAND Kyle Cranmer
- the W3C has a virus Robert Stockmann
- Bad Idea mplemmons@ee.net
- Disagree with RAND license Arnaud Vaneste
- Patent Policy draft Massimo, Tiziana e Federica
- say NO to RAND licensing N.Oden
- Re: We must fork the SVG standard (was: SVGA 1.0 uses RAND -> DO NOT ! implement it, DO NOT ! use it) Daniel Phillips
- Please do not stop innovation in its' tracks Mason Miller
- policy ht
- Do not cater to the large corporations Carolyn Hillman
- Sorry to see this happening Roman
- "Non-discriminatory" commercial licenses impossible Adrian Tymes
- Patented standards are not standards. chris.gamble@CPBINC.com
- RAND is a bad Idea Karl Doblinger
- Please Rethink Your Policy Hythian
- Free Software compatibility Dmitry Borodaenko
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> Douglas Holt
- The RAND proposed in the Patent Policy Framework Yves Savourel
- Re: We must fork the SVG standard (was: SVGA 1.0 uses RAND -> DO NOT ! implement it, DO NOT ! use it) Chris Lilley
- RAND Patent Policy - Against davis
- No thanks Morten �rsted, [MOCH]
- Re: Six issues Jim Sansing
- W3C Patent Policy Framework Christopher.J.Albertson@aero.org
- WaSP to W3C: Remember Your Mission Steven Champeon
- RAND Ryan Rajpaul
- Comment BEN BARRAZA
- If you love them, then run to them. nopatents@onmyweb.com
- Patent Policy Dhruva Reddy
- Comments to "In support of EFF's call for a royalty-free licensing model" Martin Olsson
- Why RAND will kill the W3C Mark Mumford
- wc3 Lorntz
- Patent Policy Comment Andrew Meredith
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> CoyoteinCA@netscape.net
- Draft proposal allowing Patents in W3C standards Josh Fryman
- Six issues arle lommel
- Re: We must fork the SVG standard (was: SVGA 1.0 uses RAND -> DO NOT ! implement it, DO NOT ! use it) Daniel Phillips
- Don't do it. Bill Evans
- PATENTS John Seago
- Keep the Web (Royalty) Free Mark Anderson*INTERACTIVE*
- Objection to RAND Stuart Gaunt
- The Patent Policy Framework Diego Lunetta
- in support of patent-free standards Tom Garcia
- w3c RAND licence laurent
- The W3C Patent Policy Framework Working Draft is totally unacceptable Toby Perkins
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> Thomas Longuemart
- Don't do it! Ostergaard, AJ
- In support of EFF's call for a royalty-free licensing model Peter Magnusson
- well.. Gilbert Fernandes
- Re: RAND & W3C Standards Daniel Phillips
- Stop Michael Wood
- Patent Policy Working Group Ricardo Campos
- Patent Policy Framework draft John Billings
- common sense valko yotov
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> Michael Clarke
- RAND will either kill W3C or the internet David Jander
- RAND Policy Will Destroy The Internet Aaron Swenson
- Re: We must fork the SVG standard (was: SVGA 1.0 uses RAND ->DO NOT ! implement it, DO NOT ! use it) chuck weinberger
- bad idea bwg
- Patent Policy on web standards - my concerns simeon.morgan@ideas.com.au
- Patent policy is madness Ignacio Torres Masdeu
- Vote no on rolaties bink
- comments Alice Corbin
- patents: whaddyew, crazy? Ray Gulick
- Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory ? La Place
- RAND J
Sunday, 7 October
- Free money Making Website ! Costs Of Address raserat2001@yahoo.com
- Patent Policy Framework draft The Rev. Tony Begonja
- Comment on the W3C Patent Policy Framework Working Draft Stuart Ambler
Monday, 8 October
- No RAND licensing Alan Chiu
- RAND & W3C Standards Paul Dundas
- Stupid Ukiah Smith
- Patent Policy Matthew Arieta
Sunday, 7 October
- Patent Policy Eric Johnson
- another NO vote for RAND licensing paulc@best.com
- Cease & Desist C. B. Yarling
- Scenarios related to PPG Proposal derek lane
- Re: We must fork the SVG standard (was: SVGA 1.0 uses RAND -> DO NOT ! implement it, DO NOT ! use it) Chris Lilley
- "NO" TO RAND LICENSING Mike Leary
- Re: We must fork the SVG standard (was: SVGA 1.0 uses RAND -> DO NOT ! implement it, DO NOT ! use it) Daniel Phillips
- Re: New list - www-patentpolicy-comment - maintained by djweitzner@w3.org Linda Morris
- Re: We must fork the SVG standard (was: SVGA 1.0 uses RAND -> DO NOT ! implement it, DO NOT ! use it) Daniel Phillips
- patent policy michael d. henry
- WWW Patent Policy Narada Hess
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> Meg Otto
- RAND Tor Perkins
- Say NO to RAND licensing David Mosher
- Comments Al Johnson
- Patent Policy Framework Thomas H. Mitchell, C.P.A.
- public comment Charles Geyer
- RAND patent licensing Phil Quinn
- Re: We must fork the SVG standard (was: SVGA 1.0 uses RAND ->DO NOT ! implement it, DO NOT ! use it) Chris Lilley
- RAND patent licensing Fred Condo
- Re: Patent licensing decision Bob Hayes
- Effect of public outrage?[was Re: SVG] William Loughborough
- Re: Part II: A Concrete Alternative Carol Bean
- Patent licensing decision Kevin
- W3C patent policy Richard
- Why Kenneth R Westerback
- RAND Dan Howard
- Patents don't belong on the WWW David Smith
- plea against RAND patents in W3C standards Bjoern Kriews
- RAND / Patent: NO ! Juergen Sauer
- RAND licensing and Free Software Alexandre Dulaunoy
- Re: We must fork the SVG standard (was: SVGA 1.0 uses RAND -> DO NOT ! implement it, DO NOT ! use it) Claude Zervas
Saturday, 6 October
- sack members John Priestley
Sunday, 7 October
- Free money Making Website ! Get One Before They R Gone I Got Mine raserat2001@yahoo.com
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> RM
- Re: We must fork the SVG standard (was: SVGA 1.0 uses RAND -> DO NOT ! implement it, DO NOT ! use it) Jason Antony
- Patent Policy Clifford Satlow
- Re: RAND is not bad, but we're concerned about the W3C TopXML - Mark Wilson
- Re: Tim Berners-Lee [was: SVG ad inf.] Adam Warner
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> Janette Seidel
- Tim Berners-Lee [was: SVG ad inf.] Jason Antony
- Three substantial comments dr_lenz@ziplip.co.jp
Tuesday, 2 October
- dangerous proposal Peter Lin
- W3C Patent Policy Russ Howard
- Re: RF > RAMMED ... sorry, I screwed up a link... Chris Worley
Sunday, 7 October
- No Subject dr_lenz@ziplip.co.jp
Saturday, 6 October
- Re: We must fork the SVG standard (was: SVGA 1.0 uses RAND -> DO NOT ! implement it, DO NOT ! use it) Chris Lilley
Sunday, 7 October
- Patents restrict progress Michael Rowehl
- Re: RAND is not bad, but we're concerned about the W3C Adam Warner
- Three substantial comments dr_lenz@ziplip.co.jp
- Re: RAND is not bad, but we're concerned about the W3C Adam Warner
- Patent Policy - Setting the bar on "where it is not possible" Steven Weinstein
- RAND is not bad, but we're concerned about the W3C TopXML - Mark Wilson
- Don't allow standards based on RAND Licenses B.J. Herbison
- Re: SVG ad inf. Theo de Raadt
Saturday, 6 October
- H.E.L.L.N.O. to R.A.N.D! Mike Amundsen
- Revised patent policy proposal Ippolito, Mark E.
- Against the RAND initiative Stephen Wynne
- No to RAND Sumanth Sukumar
- Against the Patent Policy Pedro Gil
- Well, its been fun... Claude Zervas
- RAND Eric Jacobsen
- License fees Ekkard Schnedermann
- Patents Svend Ezaki Tofte
- what are you doing?! josh penrod
- Enough about RAND Ray van der Woning
- Royalty Free YES, rand NO Tyler R Holcomb
- Rand Policy A.J. Madu
- Re: SVG ad inf. Chris Lilley
- W3C Patent Policy Peter Goode
- Re: SVG ad inf. Daniel Phillips
- I vote for free standards Jussi Hirvi
- Re: SVG ad inf. F J Franklin
- Re: SVG ad inf. Daniel Phillips
- Re: SVG ad inf. F J Franklin
- Response to Public Comments on the W3C Patent Policy Framework Working Draft José Luis Otermin
- Re: Part II: A Concrete Alternative Jozef Halbersztadt
- w3c: patent (entrance barrier) R. Ivan Linderman $best$
- Re: Conern of the term "reasonable and non-discriminatory royalty fees" chuck weinberger
- Breaking off Afonso Fernandez Nogueira
- patent concern Willis, Kevin J
- DON'T Orsted [Achtung]
- RAND licencing will re-define meaning of "standard" Risto Jokinen
- Allowing Patents on W3C standards will make the w3c redundant Christian Schaller
- You need to rethink your preposal about patented tech. Martin Veise
- Please don't shackle the web Khuzaima A. Lakdawala
Thursday, 4 October
- Patents Gregory Carter
Saturday, 6 October
- Concerned about the Patent Policy Peter Hanappe
- RAND (no kidding :) Lance Levsen
- Comment on The Patenting Info Keith Vick
- Why the sudden change of mind from W3C? David List
- RAND licensing = Bad Idea whj whj
- www-patentpolicy-comment Joris Van den Bergh
- Patent Policy Framework Draft Mark Koscak
- another vote against implementing RAND licensing procedures CPausheek@aol.com
- abuse of patents should not extend into standards realm John McMahon
- Conern of the term "reasonable and non-discriminatory royalty fees" Paul H. Smith
- comments about Patent Policy Framework draft Jason Brown
- Patent policy comments Terry Griffin
- I believe the W3C should not endorse Patented Technologies Shlomi Fish
- Re: RAND will fragment the web Jason Antony
- Crazy nam nguyen quoc
- Advice from a Modem War Survivor chuck weinberger
- Wrong thing going RAND Ky Vinh
- proposed W3C patent policy Dave_Touretzky@cs.cmu.edu
- Concerning Patents rdibble@dibble.net
- LiveJournal Opposes RAND Mark Kraft
- Re: We must fork the SVG standard (was: SVGA 1.0 uses RAND -> DO NOT ! implement it, DO NOT ! use it) Jason Antony
- w3.org renamed to w3.com and retired tokiko
- OT: IETF [was: [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none>] Jason Antony
- OT: IETF [was: [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none>] Jason Antony
- AGAINST RAND policy 3L@xwinds.com
- W3C Policy Breakdown Sean B. Palmer
- Rand licensing Barbara Pratt
- Patent Policy Working Group Curtis Hawthorne
- RAND licencing would lead to incompatibility problems Arto Teräs
- W3C Patent Policy Framework Working Draft Greg Doran
Friday, 5 October
- Turning the W3 into an impenetrable oligarchy kjensen
- Against RAND from Singapore Seamus Phan
- Re: Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
- Introduction of patents? God forbid! vivek achary
- RAND licensing Miaoling Chiu
Wednesday, 3 October
- Regarding the use of patented technologies in standards Paul Lee
Friday, 5 October
- patents and the 3w Richard Lyons
Wednesday, 3 October
- Allowing patented software into standards Brian Clancey
Thursday, 4 October
- Strongly disapprove David Collier-Brown
Friday, 5 October
- Changename: W3C to P3C Joe Doran
- NO Jerry Wood
- Patent Changes would cause problems - but not insurmountable ones. Peter Street
- No to patents Wanderley Ceschim
- Patent Policy Framework draft Mike Dewey
- No RAND Jim Edwards
- Re: Part II: A Concrete Alternative Daniel Phillips
- Patents Alan Woodland
- Formal Comment on W3C Patent Policy Framework, Working Draft 16 Stephen Satchell
- RAND policy et. al. Douglas Stillinger
- royalty-free web standards Jim Phillips
- Re: Opinion in opposition to RAND provisions of Patent Policy Luigi P. Bai
- open standards nicholas paredes
- Patent Policy Framework draft jduell@alumni.princeton.edu
- Patent policy Sascha Brawer
- Re: Opinion in opposition to RAND provisions of Patent Policy Daniel Phillips
- Objection to the RAND licensing option in the proposed policy. Fred Sturman
- RAND "standards" Mark W. Alexander
- The proposed change Gerald Albitre
- response to RAND Patent proposal Mann, Lydia
- Re: Part II: A Concrete Alternative Simon Brooke
- Fees for web standard products Ron Bogas
- Following the Money Trail / Going Backwards on Democracy Frank Grave de Peralta
- RF vs. RAND Mark Christensen
- Re: Part II: A Concrete Alternative Glenn Randers-Pehrson
- RAND licensing option is not sensible Louis C. Gasper, Ph.D., KHS
- W3C patent policy Christoph Weber
- patent policy comments Ilya Haykinson
- The open-source community demands the immediate withdrawal of the proposal for a new W3C Patent Policy !!!! TISCALI
- Patent Policy Framework draft Jon Osborn
- patents in W3C standards chtodd@core.com
- PersonalDB.net 회원으로 초대받으셨습니다. 관리자
- comments on patent policy Terrell Mitchell
- Feedback on the Patent Policy Framework draft Ulrich Berens
- Patents will undermine useability Charlie Brooks
- discriminatory patents Michiel Ettema
- What is reasonable? Eric Richardson
- Patent Policies Karl Lehenbauer
- W3C Patent Policy Framework Ricardo Signes
- royalties for web standards? no ! Brian Carroll
- After all your hard work? Alison Lister
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> Millsap, Michael G.
- We have to ACT acborges@netcabo.pt
- Part II: A Concrete Alternative Steve Waldman
- Patent Policy Framework draft Gordon Osse
- Will The W3C Destroy The Web? Bill Major
- Part I: General Comments Steve Waldman
- Re: Opinion in opposition to RAND provisions of Patent Policy Dunn_Bill@emc.com
- Licensing fees for implementation of standards Max Rible
- Re: Support for Open-Source Dunn_Bill@emc.com
- Opinion in opposition to RAND provisions of Patent Policy Luigi P. Bai
- Thanks but no thanks. Brian Carpenter
- Patent Policy Feedback William E. \
- Re: SVG ad inf. Chris Lilley
- Patent Policy MIKE TAYLOR
- Support for Open-Source Stephen C. Scherer
- A logical appeal to retain RF standards for Web sysadmin@pinjax.com
- patents Court Demas
- Proposed RAND Patent Policy Jeb Potterfield
- Don't add RAND licensing to the W3C process Brent J. Nordquist
- proposed standards jacques@panix.com
- RAND Licensing David Walker
- w3c proposal on patents Eric Montgomery
- RAND will fragment the web Case, Scott
- Patent Policy Framework Louis Calitz
- somethin smell fishy Ken Forbes
- RAND Is A Bad Idea Duane Robertson
- Patent Policy Framework Tommy Marcus McGuire
- Proposal for modification to Member Patent Licensing Commitments. David Woodhouse
- web-patent policy comments Tyler Morrison
- "NO" on RAND patent policy Kenn Louis
- Do not let w3c become a tool for big corporations Victor Bogado da Silva Lins
- Why a RAND? W3 & Microsoft/IE -- J. Payne
- Re: Proposal for defining acceptability of RAND licensing model. David Woodhouse
- Royalties are discriminatory. David Andrew Michael Noelle
- RAND Shawn Wall
- my opinion on the subject (Web Technology Patent Area) Pieter Reint Siegers Kort
- No to patents in W3C standards. Russell McOrmond
- Proposed Patent Policy John Panzer
- please rethink your policies regarding patents and RAND, simon
- Objection to RAND Licensing Lori Dupuy
Wednesday, 3 October
- NO NO NO! Daisy Williams
Friday, 5 October
- Objection to RAND Licensing Paul Dupuy, Jr.
- my comments on the Patent Policy for WWW Standards Dieter Van Uytvanck
- Re: Apple's SVG patent Chris Lilley
- RAND Licensing Option Lee R Boynton
- Patent Policy for WWW Standards John Gisclon
- RAND Policy for web standards Richard Coleman
- RAND implies more changes Lucio Tato
- Re: Apple's SVG patent Daniel Phillips
- Re: Proposal for defining acceptability of RAND licensing model. Daniel Phillips
- What to do about the W3C? Dave Winer
- Patent Policy Ted Bergeron
- Science != Bussiness Gustavo Carvalho Homem
- The argument against patented protocols is not ideological, it is pragmatic Russell Sears
- Re: Apple's SVG patent Chris Lilley
- Support only patent-free technology Allan Oepping
- Re: Apple's SVG patent Daniel Phillips
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> Ing. Alejandro V�zquez C.
- Comments on Patent Policy dat23
- Don't change now. Effie Kolbeins
- Comments on Patent Policy Framework draft Alex Bischoff
- STRONG OBJECTION TO the inclusion of RAND Dr. Mahesh S. Raisinghani
- Re: Apple's SVG patent Chris Lilley
- W3C Patent Policy: Bad for the W3C, bad for business, bad for users Sudhir Gandotra
- Don't mix standards with patents Nigel Stewart
- Patent Policy Framework draft Gordon Fischer
- RAND will be disastrous for the web Steven Jarvis
- Re: Apple's SVG patent Daniel Phillips
- Re: We must fork the SVG standard (was: SVGA 1.0 uses RAND -> DO NOT ! implement it, DO NOT ! use it) Chris Lilley
- Standard + RAND = Monopoly Ron Schofield
- Comments on patent policy Leonard Heyman
- SVG ad inf. F J Franklin
- comment on your patent policy framework draft ozan s. yigit
- Patent Policy Edward Terry
- Do you listen to the people? Jenny Ashman
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> dean blackketter
- Patent Policy Susan Margulies
- Vote agains the "RAND" policy. Daniel G. Linder
- no to RAND licensing XvDebbyvX@aol.com
- RAND Alex Morales
- Re: IBM's comment on w3c patent policy ZilF@aol.com
- RAND vs RF patents James Hebdon
- Re: We must fork the SVG standard (was: SVGA 1.0 uses RAND -> DO NOT ! implement it, DO NOT ! use it) Daniel Phillips
- Patents or Standards - Choose One. J. Mark Turner
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> Atabey Kaygun
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> Benjamin Edwards
- Selling out to special interests on Patent Policy Benjamin Watkins
Saturday, 6 October
- Patent Policies... Brian Powell
Friday, 5 October
- RAND = BAD idea Darren Blaser
- RAND is incompatible with free/opensource implementations Filipe Santos
- No to patents Charles McPhate
- Re: Apple's SVG patent Chris Lilley
- say no to RAND licensing Chad K. Bisk
- Re: We must fork the SVG standard (was: SVGA 1.0 uses RAND -> DO NOT ! implement it, DO NOT ! use it) Chris Lilley
- You're digging your own grave with this... Jeppe Cramon
- W3C Patent Policy/RAND Licensing Agreement BlakGard@aol.com
- RAND RFPC 1 1
- open standards are the best way to encourage innovation and interoperability Tim Edwards
- Additional sources of commentary that I believe the W3C should know about Jesper Juhl
- Just say no larfx@ticnet.com
- Re: We must fork the SVG standard (was: SVGA 1.0 uses RAND -> DO NOT ! implement it, DO NOT ! use it) Chris Lilley
- RAND Phil Reardon
- Patent Policy Ronny Krashinsky
- Re: RAND Policy Glenn Randers-Pehrson
- Comments on W3C patent policy Paul Schreiber
- W3C Patent Policy Joe Glenn
- May you please consider revising your draft? gjldp@iquebec.com
- RAND Definition Curtis Weyant
- RAND Policy al.gaspar@lrn.va.gov
- W3C Patent Policy Michaela Merz
- Re: We must fork the SVG standard (was: SVGA 1.0 uses RAND -> DO NOT ! implement it, DO NOT ! use it) Daniel Phillips
- World Wide Web Consortium Patent Policy Working Group Phillip Smith
- Re: Apple's SVG patent Glenn Randers-Pehrson
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> Peter Haight
- Just Say No to RAND Licensing Bob Glover
- Patent Policy Working Group Rick Brady
- Don't allow standards to be encumbered by patents TOM HAVILAND
- Patent Policy Framework draft Jim Jinkins
- Re: We must fork the SVG standard (was: SVGA 1.0 uses RAND -> DO NOT ! implement it, DO NOT ! use it) Glenn Randers-Pehrson
- Re: Apple's SVG patent Daniel Phillips
- Proposal for defining acceptability of RAND licensing model. David Woodhouse
- Re: We must fork the SVG standard (was: SVGA 1.0 uses RAND -> DO NOT ! implement it, DO NOT ! use it) Chris Lilley
- Public comment on the Patent Policy Framework Larry Bezeau
- Patent Policy Framework draft Matt Michaelsen
- RAND scott schmidt
- RAND Licence Arnaud Vaneste
- Good Idea, make the already big companies BIGGER! Freedome On the NET
- Re: We must fork the SVG standard (was: SVGA 1.0 uses RAND -> DO NOT ! implement it, DO NOT ! use it) Daniel Phillips
- RAND licensing is a bad idea Patrick Hoogendijk
- Patent Policy Comment Tuomas Pellonpera
- against RAND Alexander Nakhimovsky
- Re: We must fork the SVG standard (was: SVGA 1.0 uses RAND -> DO NOT ! implement it, DO NOT ! use it) Daniel Phillips
- Royalty-free licenses, PLEASE Pugsley Donald E CRBE
- w3c have been like a drug broker as japanese mafia? tat-s
- Patent Policy Bill Bland
- RAND Licensing Policy Alik Widge
- Not a GIF-issue again...please Henrik Olsson
- RAND licensing would have negative effect. Perttu Puska
- On the use of Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory fees Itamar Shtull-Trauring
- Comments on the new patent-policy Egil Moeller
- RAND license: no grazie Andrea Montefusco
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> Giuliano Carlini
- Re: [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> Daniel Phillips
- Patent policy draft: DNAR? Cedric Degea
- Re: [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> WINTER,CHRIS (HP-Sweden,ex1)
- World Wide Web Consortium Patent Policy (RAND) G.M. von Hippel
- Comment to RAND Andreas Huennebeck
- Re: We must fork the SVG standard (was: SVGA 1.0 uses RAND -> DO NOT ! implement it, DO NOT ! use it) Daniel Phillips
- comments RAND licensing Manegold
- concerns from Poland Adam Kightley
- Some of my reasons for objecting to the Patent Policy and RAND Jesper Juhl
- RAND Steven Wallace
- RE: [WD]: Patents on Web Standards - dropping the petition S.Marshall@open.ac.uk
- RAND Policy sattanino
- The issues Paolo Campanella
- Patents not in the best interest of the web community Kurt L. Sussman
- Patents will kill the standards Bruno VERNAY
- Patent Policy disapproval Bob Evans
- Would it be the end of W3C standards as standards ? xavier
- [FWD: Please keep "RAND" out of W3 standards] DspitzDan@netscape.net
- No RAND licensing W. A. Winn, D.D., Ph.D.
- W3C members [was: Your RAND dreams] Jason Antony
- No RAND licensing FreemanAZ@aol.com
- Gartner's viewpoint Jason Antony
- Please re-think patent policy. Elliott Kirschling
- Proposed RAND Policy Glenn Jacobson
- RAND patents Greg Reagle
- Re: We must fork the SVG standard (was: SVGA 1.0 uses RAND -> DO NOT ! implement it, DO NOT ! use it) Donald E. Eastlake 3rd
- just say no Daniel Pirone
- Patents and Standards: two competing philosophies kevingmoore
- Absurd Patent Policy Howard Christeller
- NO to RAND Matthias Urlichs
- Standards Kamil Jonca
- PPF draft Rick Potthoff
- non-free patents have no place in w3c standards David Kimdon
- Re: Comment on WC-3 Patent Policy Dick Byrd
- RAND is a Thought Policeman's Charter Derek Lewis
- RAND comments. Greg Wilkins
- RAND: Misguided, Wrong Shamim Mohamed
- Patents violate founding principle of w3.org Bill Gallagher
- This says is all Tom Hood
- why the W3C should reject RAND Andrew Hagen
- Voice against the use of pateneted standards on the web vik@econz.co.nz
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> JTM
- Patent Policy Framework Draft td
- patent policy reponse Zach Welch
- Attack on democracy? Martin Leisener
- Patents have no place in standards Gavin Treadgold
- What ? are you crazy David Boosalis
- Why are you choosing the wrong way? Juan R. Pozo
Thursday, 4 October
- fees SkinWalker
Friday, 5 October
- charging money for e-mail, etc. William Wallace
- Cybersource vehemently opposes the W3C Patent Policy Framework proposal Con Zymaris
Thursday, 4 October
- Reject RAND Shiraz Kanga
- Re: [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> Dave Reeve
- W3C Patent policy- ? why Michael Guercio
- Patent compromise? Tim Mensch
- Royalty on Patents Jeremy Conn
- patent inclusion in W3C standards Doug Hunt
- Fork to gnuStandards if the W3C hurts the web mark_tracey@yahoo.com
- No software patents through the back door Alexander List
- www-patentpolicy-comment Matt Kasdorf
- Please Reject the Patent Policy Framework Working Draft Chris Geanious
- [www-patentpolicy-comment] <none> gte592n@prism.gatech.edu
- Your Technology Sucks! CharlesAdams14@aol.com
- :( CharlesAdams14@aol.com
- The W3C Patent Policy undermine the W3C credibility and neutrality. TISCALI
- Comment on patent policy Lowell Harris
- Opposition to the incorporation of licensed technology- an example from the Airlines Justin Seiferth
- Idiot notion to include patented technology in web standards FDWeller on Qwest
- Think about our great great grand children. Charles Esson
- Opposed to Patents in Web Standards SuperLinux
- RAND Terry Bailey
- RAND Curt Wuollet
- comment on RAND Russell Uman
- Free Internet, Free Standards misterl@primusnetz.de
- FEES Bert Veldhuizen
- RAND is a bad idea Ray Benjamin
- No Patents J. Ramsey
- Open the W3C to developers or the developers will found a new W3C !!! TISCALI
- Application Developer Arlen A. Greer
- W3C Patent Policy Johannes la Poutre
- "Standards" driven by profit? Sounds proprietary to me! Jesse W. Asher
- YOU are completely selfish & greedy Howard Smith
- Do I understand this issue? Dietrich, Joseph
- Patent Policy Emery, Pat
- patent policy cheeser@ionet.net
- I oppose patented standards James
- Clarity is key Joe Chellman
- FTC denied Dell patent rights to VESA VL bus in 1996 Jim Davies
- RAND bordcon@earthlink.net
- This developer strongly opposes "RAND" proposal Cole Thompson
- Re: NO STANDARDS WITH PATENTS donald.hohman@pncbank.com
- keep it open please<

www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org from October 2001 by date