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

Re: We must fork the SVG standard (was: SVGA 1.0 uses RAND -> DO NOT ! implement it, DO NOT ! use it)

From: Daniel Phillips <phillips@bonn-fries.net>
Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2001 13:23:09 +0200
To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>, www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org
Message-Id: <20011005112303Z17059-17200+740@humbolt.nl.linux.org>
On October 4, 2001 02:00 pm, Chris Lilley wrote:
> > Interestingly, the timing of the SVG 1.0 release seems to be closely
> > correlated with the proposed change to W3C's patent policy currently being
> > discussed.
> Yes. We were indeed beta testing the patent policy before it was
> publically released.

But the fact remains that the SVG standard was formalized before the patent 
policy on which it relies was formally adopted.  You have not explained why 
the SVG standard acceptance could not have been delayed until the patent 
policy revision was completed.  Having jumped the gun, you created the 
impression of surreptitious intent.

> > So, the SVG standard was formalized and includes RAND licencing 
> > arrangements even though RAND licencing was not an official W3C policy at 
> > the time.
> Right. RF is better than RAND, but RAND is better than "nothing at all"
> which would have been the situation had we not done that.

No, you are wrong.  A patent-encumbered internet standard is far worse for 
the public than no standard at all.  A patent-encumbered internet standard 
enshrines the right of a patent holder to charge a toll on the internet.  It 
is much better to write a new standard that is not encumbered by patents, and 
it must be the responsibility of the W3C to do exactly that.  You appear to 
be trying to evade that responsibility.

Received on Friday, 5 October 2001 07:23:04 UTC

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