- From: Chris Rankin <rankincj@yahoo.com>
- Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2001 11:23:13 -0700 (PDT)
- To: www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org
I think that the rest of the world is smelling a rat here. Consider the following scenario: - Some company patents a new content-format, and it is approved by the W3C under a RAND license. - Some non-free browser vendors are able to pay the royalties and implement the new format. Others (e.g. Open Source ones) cannot afford to and so are left out. - Another non-free web-authoring tool vendor then adds the new content-format to its product, all under the banner of W3C-compliance. Again, Open-Source tools are left out. - Marketed under the banner of being "fully W3C compliant", people start generating web-pages containing the new content format, all of which are unreadable to people running Open-Source browsers on Open-Source operating systems. And imagine if the browser vendor and web-authoring tool vendor were the same company, who also owned the dominant desktop operating system. Imagine also if the browser and authoring tools were bundled with that operating system to achieve maximum market penetration in the shortest possible time. Do you get the impression that maybe some companies are trying to seize control of the web by saturating it with proprietary content? That maybe the W3C is being used as the wrapper for their poison candy? Please ensure that the World-Wide Web *remains* world-wide and available to *all* by rejecting RAND licensing in favor of open and royalty-free licensing. Sincerely, Chris Rankin __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Listen to your Yahoo! Mail messages from any phone. http://phone.yahoo.com
Received on Sunday, 30 September 2001 14:23:14 UTC