W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2014

Re: CfC: publish LCWD of Screen Orientation API; deadline September 18

From: <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2014 00:34:08 +0200
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Cc: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com>, Mounir Lamouri <mounir@lamouri.fr>, Webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
Message-Id: <61141412634848@webcorp02f.yandex-team.ru>

06.10.2014, 09:19, "Jonas Sicking" <jonas@sicking.cc>:
> On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 2:28 PM, <chaals@yandex-team.ru> wrote:
>> So the question turns on whether the changes would invalidate a patent review, and my quick guess is that the answer is "yes" ;(
> Really? I would have made the opposite conclusion. Changing the event
> source makes a very small difference in behavior. I would greatly
> surprise me if it affected the applicability of a given patent.

There are a lot of patents that hang on such slender threads. And PAGs have been formed for them, only to discover that such a simple change made the difference between the patent being relevant or not.

> That said, it is theoretically possible. But that seems to be true for
> *any* normative change of a spec.

Right. That's why normative changes require returning to Last Call. :(

It seems that the way patents are handled, at least in the US which effectively seems to be the only jurisdiction W3C really cares about, is slowly changing. But slowly - and for some time we're probably tied to the fact that almost any normative changes can effectively revoke the licensees given under the Patent Policy.



Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
chaals@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Monday, 6 October 2014 22:34:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:14:31 UTC