W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org > August 2013

A Question About the Licensing Conditions Listed in Patent Disclosures

From: Jeffery Wong <ldwcy000@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2013 01:39:21 +0800
Message-ID: <CACLouJ=r1sa0bX=1xfL7aQOqC0FDTo_iJhUqP+_F=67JSsFjeQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org
Hello! I'm interested in the patent policy of W3C and writing this email to
ask a question about some licensing conditions listed in some patent
disclosures. According to the W3C patent policy, all participants in  a
Work Group must agree to the W3C RF licensing requirement. If a participant
does not agree to license a certain patent including essential claims under
W3C RF licensing requirement, it should provoke the exclusion mechanism to
exclude the essential claims. However, I found that some patent disclosures
listed in the W3C website contain statements as "Not excluded, but not
under Royalty-Free commitment". For example:

Does this kind of statement mean that the participant does not want to
license the essential claims under the RF licensing condition as well as
not to exclude them? Is such option acceptable in accordance with the W3C
patent policy? Moreover, will a PAG be established concerning such
essential claims?

Yours sincerely,
Jeffery Wong
Received on Sunday, 18 August 2013 18:47:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:06:50 UTC