- From: Jim Farmer <jxf@immagic.com>
- Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 18:41:45 -0400
- To: <www-patentpolicy-comment@W3.org>
There are three major flaws in the Patent Policy. First "reasonable and non-discriminatory" is the gateway to extensive litigation. It is a concept that does not have significant legal precedent and therefore will be open to extended judicial interpretation. Who would want to implement a standard where the price will be determined several years in the future? What small business--the source of creativity--can afford litigation at this level? The concept itself is discriminatory because of the cost of litigation. Second, standards are for widespread and general use. Patented standards, regardless of the price, will be a disincentive to implement a standard. This will slow and could prevent the adoption of a standard that would be beneficial to all if it were widely adopted. Third, the culture of the Internet and W3C has been sharing. The same level of cooperation will not be possible if every presentation, every decision is based on the direct contribution to income from royalties. If those who particiapted in the JEDEC representatives had known their work was being used by Rambus for a patent application, I am sure the discussions would have been less productive. Clearly there are pressures from W3C sponsors to benefit directly from their contribution. In the long run the proposed policy would irreversiblly damage the collegial standards making process. We expected better from W3C. Or putting it another way, W3C should not accept responsibility for full employment of lawyers. As Sony's chairman said, in the U.S. we need more engineers and fewer lawyers. jim farmer Chairman instructional media + magic, inc. 202 296-2807
Received on Tuesday, 2 October 2001 18:35:47 UTC