- From: Steven W McDougall <swmcd@world.std.com>
- Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2001 17:00:54 -0400 (EDT)
- To: www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org
It seems like there is a conceptual problem in writing standards for patented technology. If a technology is truly deserving of a patent, then we shouldn't need standards for its use: the patent will instruct us in the use of the technology, and there won't be any other way to solve the problem. If there are implementation details that need be specified, then the patent holder--as both the owner and the beneficiary of the patent--should specify them, as Phillips did for the audio cassette format, and Sony did for the CD format. If a technology isn't truly innovative; if it shouldn't have been patented in the first place, but it was (for example, because the U.S. patent system is broken) then there will be other ways to solve the problem. In this case, we need a standard to specify which of the available alternatives we will use. Obviously, we should choose an alternative which is *not* patented. I realize that this analysis is somewhat simplistic, but I'll stand by my conclusion: a standards body should regard patents as damage, and route around them. - SWM
Received on Monday, 8 October 2001 17:00:55 UTC