W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org > July 2002

Re: W3C BACK to "RAND" Exception?

From: Seth Johnson <seth.johnson@realmeasures.dyndns.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 01:46:37 -0400
Message-ID: <3D2BCA3D.51CF6909@RealMeasures.dyndns.org>
To: Adam Warner <lists@consulting.net.nz>
CC: www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org


. . . and may I forward that interesting nugget of
information?

Seth Johnson

Adam Warner wrote:
> 
> Seth Johnson wrote in part:
> 
> > The important question has now become: who is encouraging
> > the W3C and its PPWG to introduce these provisions.  Let
> > these parties explain why they feel this move is of benefit
> > to the W3C, and to the public at large.
> 
> > This is a question that cannot be addressed without such a
> > disclosure and presentation on the part of those seeking to
> > benefit from the institution of such a policy by a body such
> > as the W3C.
> 
> Seth, Bruce Perens over at LWN confirms that he is forbidden from
> revealing the names of the parties that are trying to introduce this
> exception:
> 
> http://www.lwn.net/Articles/4404/
> 
> I agree that we will be better able to understand the motivations behind
> these moves if the members making this proposal reveal themselves. And
> more fundamentally we do not even have access to the proposal.
> 
> Regards,
> Adam

-- 

[CC] Counter-copyright:
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/cc/cc.html

I reserve no rights restricting copying, modification or
distribution of this incidentally recorded communication. 
Original authorship should be attributed reasonably, but
only so far as such an expectation might hold for usual
practice in ordinary social discourse to which one holds no
claim of exclusive rights.
Received on Wednesday, 10 July 2002 01:47:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 April 2010 00:13:49 GMT