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

No to Patents, Yes to Discrimination

From: Sheryl Coe <web@reportica.com>
Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2001 15:22:47 -0400
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010930142124.00ac3690@reportica.net>
To: www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org

Dear www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org,

In reference to your attempts to label the use of patents as 
'non-discrimatory':
http://www.w3.org/2001/08/16-PP-FAQ.html#[2-4]

I suggest that very essence of the job of W3C as a 'standards body' is to 
_discriminate_.

Your duty is to choose standards that will serve the community, and pass 
over those that will hobble it with proprietary requirements. Those in 
charge of this Patent Committee have abrogated the search for community 
standards, and replaced it with a search for corporate profits.

Go ahead... Discriminate!

	 "dis·crim·i·nate 1. To make a clear distinction; distinguish:
	discriminate among the options available.
	To make sensible decisions; judge wisely."

You are On Notice: If any individual technical process, however efficient, 
is PATENTED, we must DISCRIMINATE against it on the basis of that patent 
alone -- despite any claimed or real technical merits. Why? Because Freedom 
of Access matters more than any fleeting technical expedience. In the long 
run, Open Standards will always result in a more robust technical solution.

We REQUIRE free access to standard technologies. The process MATTERS. You 
propose a benign dictatorship. We decline. Access to Open Standards is, in 
the words of Franklin, an 'essential liberty'.

	"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
	efficiency deserve neither liberty nor efficiency."
		Mangled from Ben Franklin, ~1784

Of course, the real danger here is not to our liberty, but to the relevance 
of the W3C.

Respecfully,

Sheryl Coe
Received on Sunday, 30 September 2001 16:07:43 GMT

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