- From: Aram Zucker-Scharff via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2022 15:05:09 +0000
- To: public-patcg@w3.org
@jwrosewell: > The "input data" is the data needed to implement proposals that the Working Group create. [...] Therefore the answer depends on each proposals. This seems to me to be a strong argument towards the consideration of FRAND on a proposal by proposal basis. Trying to create a FRAND guarantee in the charter when it must be applied differently to different proposals on the basis of their design and when our understanding of its application shifts on the basis of proposals' functionality seems to be bad process. It may not even apply to some proposals. @timcowen > You make reference to the antitrust guidelines of the W3C. They are something that ought to be reviewed at the present time and that might be something to be picked up with appropriate support. I would of course be happy to help in that endeavour. I would repeat my earlier question while also noting that not only are we automatically bound by the W3C guidelines and reference them explicitly at the top of CG meetings, we also have, in response to @jwroswell's input, explicitly added and noted we are bound by them in the charter. Is there some additional picking up you would like us to do in regards to the antitrust guidelines that we have not yet done. I would be happy to accept your help in making the application of W3C rules in the charter as clear as possible. -- GitHub Notification of comment by AramZS Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/patcg/patwg-charter/issues/30#issuecomment-1171335829 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Thursday, 30 June 2022 15:05:14 UTC