W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org > October 2001

Just an example

From: Dominique Broeglin <broeglin@free.fr>
Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2001 08:20:34 +0200
Message-ID: <3BB80B32.678BAA2D@free.fr>
To: www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org
	
	Just an example of what your proposed "RAND license" is already
changing. We were planning, to use SVG for an open learning
environnement in an university context. Today, after reading "SVG 1.0
Patent Statements" we have to reconsider this position. Even the
possibility that we, as developpers, or the future users of this product
may have to pay a license for SVG usage is a blocking factor for the use
of SVG in our project.

	Besides, I have a lot of difficulties understanding the "reasonable and
non-discriminatory" term. A uniform fee for everyone is far more
damaging than a "discrimatory" one because a large company can easily
afford this fee. An educatinonnal project, or an open source projetct
can not. 
	The initial intent of the W3C policy (i.e. try to reach a consensus)
was very usefull for the development of web standards. But this idea
seems to me in complete contradiction with the possibility for ONE of
the participants in a recomendation to ask all users of that
recommendation to pay a fee.
	
	Sorry for my poor english, 

	Dominique Broeglin
Received on Monday, 1 October 2001 02:20:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 April 2010 00:13:40 GMT