W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-voice@w3.org > October to December 2001

RE: The Open Source Initiative OSI letter of comment on W3C's proposed RAND policy.

From: Charles F. Munat <chas@munat.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 22:14:15 -0800
To: "Brett Serkez, Techie" <techie@serkez.net>, <vxi-discuss@metronomicon.com>, <www-voice@w3.org>
Message-ID: <LHEGJAOEDCOFFBGFAPKBCEABCNAA.chas@munat.com>
I've been holding my tongue regarding the W3C's RAND policy because others
have been doing a more than adequate job of expressing my views, but there
is one view I have yet to see expressed.

For the past 3-4 years I have been participating in W3C discussion groups
and working groups and have been extensively testing and implementing W3C
technologies. I estimate that my total time commitment to this task has been
well over 1000 hours, unpaid.

By comparison, I am certain that there are a great many people who have
contributed far more than I have, also uncompensated. Now I ask, why should
I continue to give my time to the W3C without thought of compensation while
some corporate contributors are allowed to charge fees for the use of their
contributions?

Tim Berners-Lee has spoken frequently of the benefits that the web will have
for democracy. How, Tim, will proprietary standards benefit democracy?

If this policy is put in force, I will devote my efforts to other groups who
understand the importance of free and open standards. I will openly join the
revolt suggested by OSI. I suspect a great many others will as well. We may
be generous, but we're not fools.

Sincerely,
Charles F. Munat
Seattle, Washington


-----Original Message-----
From: www-voice-request@w3.org [mailto:www-voice-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of
Brett Serkez, Techie
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 4:01 PM
To: vxi-discuss@metronomicon.com; www-voice@w3.org
Subject: The Open Source Initiative OSI letter of comment on W3C's proposed
RAND policy.


Eric S. Raymond's official position on W3C's RAND policy...

http://opensource.org/press_releases/w3c.html

Clear and well thought out as have been previous postings
against RAND, or atleast against RAND as it stands today.
Did I miss the clear, well thought out, and defendable
postings supporting RAND?

I am interested in comments on the defendability of
the disclosed patents on VoiceXML.  Since there are
implementations of VoiceXML today, and the patent
holders are not currently enforcing their patents by
collecting royalities (atleast from the best I can tell),
doesn't this mean that they have effectively given up their
claim?  Patents need to be vigoriously defended to remain
in effect/defendable.
Received on Wednesday, 14 November 2001 01:13:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 30 October 2006 12:48:54 GMT