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

ambiguity of language

From: don bright's spam buffer <aeoespam@sdf.lonestar.org>
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2001 09:29:09 +0000 (UTC)
To: <www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.4.33.0110010913420.2281-100000@sdf.lonestar.org>

Greetings,

I would very much like the language of the RAND License clarified.  In
particular the use of the word "may" at the beginning of items 3,4,5, and
6 is disturbing. for example:

"6. may not impose any further conditions or restrictions on the use . . ."

This seems to imply that the license may or may not impose further
restrictions. Perhaps this seems nonsense and anal, but I am trying to
think like a lawyer. If you allow "may" to be a valid interpretation
of item 6, which it arguably is, then you will obviously be letting in
things you don't want. I will now list some of those things.

There have been many licenses in recent years that restrict licensees from
doing everything from producing similar products, to using similar
products, to making disparaging comments about the licensor, to aiding
third parties in doing any of the above. Such licenses, if placed on the
core protocols of the internet, would strike a heavier blow than ten
thousand viruses and worms ever could. This is why I urge you to make the
language of what qualifies as a RAND License crystal clear. Please render
it indestructible in a court of law.


aeoespam@sdf.lonestar.org
SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org
Received on Monday, 1 October 2001 05:29:17 GMT

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