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

A few more comments (this time on the specific wording of the "W3C Patent Policy Framework")

From: Jesper Juhl <juhl@eisenstein.dk>
Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2001 10:22:44 +0200
Message-ID: <3BC2B3D4.2020200@eisenstein.dk>
To: www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org

Here some comments on the wording of the "W3C Patent Policy Framework" 
(http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-patent-policy-20010816/) proposed by the W3C.

In section 2.1 you say:

"The second decade of the Web has already demonstrated that patents will be
a factor in the ongoing development of the World Wide Web 
infrastructure. A variety of factors suggest that the Web will be 
increasingly affected by the patent process."

This is true, the web will be affected by patents in some way, but in my 
oppinion the W3C should work to minimize that effect, and some statement 
to that effect should be here.


In section 5.2 you have this list:

"
The following two licensing mode choices are
available for Working Groups:
   1. Reasonable, non-discriminatory terms (RAND)
   2. Royalty-free (RF)
"

If you deside to allow licensing under RAND terms (which I hope you will 
not), then I suggest that you change the order of the list to list the 
RF licensing mode first to indicate that it is the prefered licensing mode.


In section 7.2 you have the following:

"...Disclosure obligations shall not obligate a Member to
conduct a search of its patent portfolio. No extraordinary effort is 
required
for patent disclosure requests, nor should such requests be given lower
priority than other communication efforts undertaken by the Advisory 
Committee
representative..."

I very much dislike the "Disclosure obligations shall not obligate a 
Member to
conduct a search of its patent portfolio" part.
We are talking about good faith here. Wouldn't you consider it natural 
that if you have a patent portfolio that you search it for patents that 
might be relevant? A members own patent portfolio is the first place the 
member should look!



Regards,
Jesper Juhl
Received on Tuesday, 9 October 2001 04:30:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 April 2010 00:13:42 GMT