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

Re: Learn from recent history.

From: Glenn Randers-Pehrson <glennrp@home.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2001 17:30:51 -0400
Message-Id: <>
To: Daniel Phillips <phillips@bonn-fries.net>
Cc: www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org
At 11:09 PM 10/3/01 +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote:
>Yes, sad but true.  It is for this reason that we must not allow SVG in its 
>current RAND-tainted form to become a defacto standard, or to be perceived by 
>the public as a standard.

I agree but am not sure how to proceed.  As you may have noted in another
message of mine, RAND in SVG didn't get any public review, and it's unclear
what if anything is actually subject to patents.  The most dangerous thing
is that Adobe is most likely to have a patent that will be infringed, and
the rules allow them to renege on their promise of RF licensing because
Kodak and Apple didn't promise RF.

>Given the near-universal sense of outrage that has been expressed so far it 
>is not unreasonable to assume that the non-technical public, too, will be 
>able to grasp the issues and will respond as we have.

From the sudden influx of rather clueless messages this morning complaining
of Internet Tax, etc., I guess the mainstream press has picked up the

>For non-technical web users, it comes down to a question of whether they are 
>happy to be forced to pay for something that is normally free, like the air 
>we breathe.


Did you intend for this colloquy to go to the list?  You only wrote to me.

Received on Wednesday, 3 October 2001 17:33:40 UTC

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