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

Sell out covered up by NewSpeak

From: jk05308 <jk05308@alltel.net>
Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2001 23:07:21 -0500
To: www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org
Message-Id: <01092923072100.05416@jerrykreps>
I register my complaint against the proposed RAND policy.  

Here is why, employing my thoughts and those of others, whom
I paraphrase.

This policy will mean the death of the Internet within the USA and all
other countries that have recipricol legal agreements.  Other countries,
where our legal system can't reach, will continue with their own
version of W3C, moving their branches of the Internet to technical
positions far superior to what our branches will become, hampered by 
patents on 'IP' and plagued by "folks who, without those abusive
patents, wouldn't have the intellect to open a can of beer on their own."

The RAND is such a blatent attack on Open Source and GPL that
it suggests a total sell-out by W3C to Microsoft, a corporation convicted 
of aquiring its market dominance by using an illegal monopoly, whose 
conviction was upheld in appeal, and to Micosoft's corporate lackies and 
allies.   

It wasn't too long ago that the W3C condemnded Microsoft for their theft 
and bastardization of the Kerberos standard.   Yet the committee, at least 
one of whom works for the convicted felon, (are there others on the felon's 
payroll secretly?)  recommends turning the Internet over to the felon and its 
allies, lock, stock and barrel.  

Amazing, saddening, frustrating, and the cause of much anger...

What Microsoft can't win by innovation on a level playing field they either
try to steal or buy outright with cash or 'partnership' using the the siren 
song of wealth.   The community as a whole, not just the corporations,  
have held the W3C in esteem and respect, and volunteered many man-years 
to its work, for the betterment of the entire internet.   Now the W3C seems willing 
to exploit that freely given largess and work as whores for the corporations.
The proposed policy is, in every way, identical to Microsoft attempting to steal 
the personal informatioin of every Passport user and, astroundingly, copyright 
that info as if Microsoft 'invented' it, as if it was its own 'intellectual property'. 

It is interesting to note that Microsoft has dodged the legal bullet by political
buyout and betrayal of the judical process.  Their buggy and insecure software
is earning the ire of the entire world as the leading cause of the clogging of
internet pipelines by CodeRed and Nimda.  Microsoft is further earning the
outrage of the world by their aggregious XP licensing policy, their registration
wizard, and their general disregard for consumer rights, as indicated in their
new EULA for FrontPage 2000, where Microsoft has the audacity to limit
free speech rights of those who purchase FrontPage 2000.    They add injury to
insult by extracting extortion, under the guise of license 'renewal' fees, via their paid
henchmen, the BSA.   

The heady days of exponential PC sales driving a monoply position is over, 
and no longer contributing to Microsoft's bottom line.  Their market is saturated 
and they are desparately seeking other income streams that can sustain their 
corporate overhead.   Enter .NET, Passport and Hailstorm.  There is bad news, 
however.Microsoft is not receiving the rave reviews for .NET, Passport and 
Hailstorm that they had hoped for.   People recognized it for what it was: an 
attempt by Microsoft to replace its PC tax on new hardware sales, with a internet 
transaction tax, on both ends of every transaction, via their pay-per-use schemes.  
Further,  Microsoft was going to steal the personal data of Internet users and 
sell it to the highest bidders.   To make matters worse, the idea of suppliers and 
consumers of data entrusting it to Microsoft servers received death blows when 
it became obvious that Microsoft cannot even protect their own data on their own 
servers, nor can they keep them online.  Russian crackers had a field day downloading
all their "family jewels".  Could this be the reason for the deluge of new and more 
deadly viri, worms and trojans dropping IIS serves like so many dead flies?

"The consumer has made Gates the richest man in the world and he rewards 
the consumer by calling and treating them as thieves.  Does his greed have 
no bounds? " Apparently not.   

Gates may have $50 Billion in cash, but Microsoft is in financial distress.  
That is obvious by the number of shares key Microsoft  stockholders and 
executives have sold recently.   50B won't last long in a company with as 
much infrastructure as has Microsoft, and since W2K wasn't a big success, 
Office isn't going anywhere, and now XP is meeting tons of complaints and 
resistance.  The BSA isn't generating the kinds of income streams Microsoft 
needs.    Microsoft needs other ways of competing against Linux and the 
GPL, and to prevent the mass movement of Windows users to Linux.  

Besides supporting the SSSCA, a bill which would make the most reliable and
secure OS in the world illegal, while making the most unreliable and insecure 
OS in the world the 'standard', all in the name of security, they are intent on
getting the hackers who work on Linux and GPL software declared 'terrorists',
a bizaar use of the term if there ever was one.  

Subverting the W3C is just another part of their offensive against the GPL.
Too bad the committee members and the W3C are to arrogant, stupid or
greedy to see it.

The question now:  Has the W3C been seduced by greed?  They will answer
that question shortly.  Shortly after that the community that donated many
man-years to them, admired them and supported them will determine if their
efforts and contributions have been appreciated, and what its response will be.
If the W3C adopts this RAND "policy" they may find out quickly how the rest
of the community will treat their action as a total and complete betrayal, and
respond accordingly.  

Jerry Kreps
Lincoln, NE
Received on Sunday, 30 September 2001 00:07:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 April 2010 00:13:39 GMT