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

Re: W3C's Response to Public Comments on the Patent Policy Framework Working Draft

From: Daniel Phillips <phillips@bonn-fries.net>
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 07:06:01 +0200
To: Janet Daly <janet@w3.org>, www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org
Cc: djw@w3.org
Message-Id: <20011002050600Z16026-2757+2777@humbolt.nl.linux.org>
On October 2, 2001 05:28 am, Janet Daly wrote:
> All;
> This is the plain text version of W3C's Response to Public Comments on
> the W3C Patent Policy Framework Working Draft. The Hypertext version,
> with links, is available at:
> 	http://www.w3.org/2001/10/patent-response

From the document:

   3. Is this the end of of Royalty-Free licenses for W3C Recommendations?

   No. The policy defines two licensing modes for a Working Group: 
   Royalty-Free and RAND.

I can't take the liberty of speaking for everybody, but at this point it is 
not hard to see that many hold a similar view: I do not want RAND.  How clear 
can I make that?  I do not want to have it explained to me why I am wrong and 
really should want RAND.

> In response to requests from the public and W3C Member organizations,
> W3C has decided to extend the review period (for both public and
> Members) until 11 October 2001.

That is not long enough.  Furthermore, it is not sufficient to simply extend 
the comment period.  The entire process should be begun again from the start,
without the apparent attempt at concealment from public view, and with
participation of other interested parties, such as members of the open
source community.

Without this, W3C will be unable to claim any kind of legitimacy for this 

It would also not hurt to admit the obvious: that the W3C has a fiasco on its 

Received on Tuesday, 2 October 2001 01:06:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:06:44 UTC