W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2015

Re: PSA: Web Components vs Extract Widget patent

From: Aymeric Vitte <vitteaymeric@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 00:01:17 +0200
Message-ID: <555E55AD.9060307@gmail.com>
To: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
Since this is public now for everybody, please let me give some
additional information.

We think that the extraction mechanisms described in the patent and not
covered by any spec will happen one day too, and could be integrated in
the Web Components spec, the purpose being to extract a customized
custom element from any site, not only from the constructor site, it's
probably very simple to specify now, if there is some interest we could
participate to this.

>From a technical standpoint, please see below everything we have written
about the obvious similitudes between the patent (2010) and the Web
Components (2012), as well as the widget-like projects (2013/2014).

If someone finds some anteriority, then please advise, this is what we
have been asking for since 6 months, but please read what follows before.

The enormous difference between what describes the patent and all
existing technologies when we issued it is that all existing
technologies were producing gadgets:

- that were sandboxed (iframes for example) and could not interact with
the other elements of the web page where they were injected
- that were displayed alone
- that needed some specific format, development skills or tools (like
browsers, frameworks, apis) to be created and displayed
- that could not necessarily render or adapt on any devices, like mobiles

To my knowledge, at that time no project never envisioned at any moment
any gadgets that could be integrated into a web page as normal browser
elements (ie DOM elements) on any device possibly interacting with the
other browser elements of the page while keeping their own properties
not interfering between each others, which is very exactly what the
patent describes and what the Web Components are about.

One of the reason probably is that this was extraordinarly complicate to
perform at that time, like for our past projects which were difficult to
implement, and still is today, except if we use the Web Components or
widget-like concepts of today helped by the improvements brought by
ES6/7 and HTML.

The patent describes an universal method to accomplish the above and the
definition of a "gadget" in the patent is very clear regarding its
ability to interact with the rest of the page.

I have tried to detail all this and performed a detailed comparison with
the Web Components and widget-like projects here:

- "Main claim, scope and applications"

Which shows that not only Web Components are impacted, but all
widget-like projects, thousands of projects, and soon or later all projects.

and here:

-"Extract Widget" Patent FR2962237 - Process to create an application of
gadget type incorporated into a container of widget type" -

The second gist is a bit long and the translation of the patent probably
not perfect, beside the detailed comparison for each claim of the patent
with the Web Components, the most interesting section is probably: "The
patent vs the traditional approach = Web Components"

Regarding a possible solution, to make it short, since now 6 months
(realizing at last that all the components projects were infringing the
patent) we have stated that we would like to find an agreement so we
transfer the rights of the patent to the W3C members and they sublicense
it royalty free for everybody via the W3C.

This agreement should cover at least the costs of our past projects
related to the patent from 2007 to 2012 developed by Naïs' team, which
were all killed when we realized that Google had decided to deprecate
its Search API, but not only Google is in cause here since no Search
APIs were available from any of the major internet companies.

We will not elaborate on this here, this situation leaded us to develop
our current privacy/anonymity oriented projects, which usually everybody
loves until we talk about financing, that's what the potential agreement
will be used for, if any.



Le 20/05/2015 15:24, Arthur Barstow a écrit :
> Hi All,
> For those interested in Web Components, please note I received a related
> e-mail titled "Web Components vs Extract Widget patent". I forwarded
> this e-mail (which has an attachment) to the www-archive list:
> <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2015May/0008.html>
> Please do NOT discuss the specifics of the referenced patent on
> public-webapps.
> Yves, Xiaoqian - will this information result in the formation of a
> Patent Advisory Group [PAG]? If yes, when will that PAG be "launched"?
> -Thanks, ArtB
> [PAG] http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/#sec-Exception

Check the 10 M passwords list: http://peersm.com/findmyass
Anti-spies and private torrents, dynamic blocklist: http://torrent-live.org
Peersm : http://www.peersm.com
torrent-live: https://github.com/Ayms/torrent-live
node-Tor : https://www.github.com/Ayms/node-Tor
GitHub : https://www.github.com/Ayms
Received on Thursday, 21 May 2015 22:01:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 October 2017 07:27:31 UTC