- From: Mario D. Santana <mds@mariosantana.net>
- Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2001 11:47:28 -0700
- To: www-patentpolicy-comment@w3c.org
Others have posted more lucid arguments than I can for dismissing or largely rewriting the proposed policy. I would like here to lodge my dissent and also respond to Gerry Lane's comment. Mr. Lane said: "The W3C Patent Policy Framwork proposal will never provide complete certainty for specification developers and product implementers. We should allow the technical experts to work unencumbered by complicated rules and leave the patent issues for discussion outside of the standards organizations." The first statement seems to imply that the proposed policy would provide more certainty than current practice. I disagree. Mr. Lane mentions earlier that there will always be uncertainty regarding patents held by non-W3C organizations. True enough -- those are problems neither created nor addressable directly by the W3C. The proposed policy, however, would add to that necessary uncertainty, the unnecessary ones surrounding patents held by members. There are many more non-member than member patent holders; however, that this "small" addition of uncertainty will fuel scheming and intrigue is evident in Mr. Lane's second statement above. I can only speak for myself, but as a "technical expert," I would not like for my work to be subject to "complicated rules" outside my control. More, I am slightly insulted at Mr. Lane's subtle implication that these rules are far enough beyond me that they would cripple my work. By adopting the proposed policy, the W3C will show that it does not consider patent issues a critical component of a technical specification. A blanket policy that leaves the control of these issues to interested parties is not the way to foster strong cooperation -- certainly not among the non-member public, patent-holding or otherwise. The war for open standards is long and tiresome. But if you sacrifice your ultimate goal in order to reach your immediate goal, you gain nothing. Please consider dismissing this proposed policy, or substantially rewriting it to promote openness in standards and their implementations. Sincerely, Mario D. Santana <mds@mariosantana.net> -- My claim is that it is possible to write /grand/ programs, /noble/ programs, truly /magnificent/ ones! -- Donald E. Knuth
Received on Saturday, 29 September 2001 14:47:58 UTC