Re: W3C patent policy

On October 2, 2001 02:15 am, Daniel J. Weitzner wrote:
> Hello Eben,
> 
> Thanks for these comments. You will see shortly that we are extending the
> comment period for this draft until 11 October 2001. So, I'll ask you a
> question that I hope you can answer in that time. While I understand the
> overall spirit of your opposition to proposed recognition of RAND licensing.
> I would appreciate your thoughts on whether the Royalty-Free licensing
> structure proposed [1] is consistent with the GPL and other open source
> licenses.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Danny Weitzner

An 11 day extension for comments is completely inadequate considering the way 
the original process was kept from public view.  I would like to suggest that 
it would be more appropriate to restart this process from the beginning, this 
time with all procedings conducted in public and with participation of all 
interested parties.

--
Daniel

------------------------------- 
> --
> Daniel J. Weitzner    +1.617.253.8036 (MIT)
> World Wide Web Consortium   +1.202.364.4750 (DC)
> Technology & Society Domain Leader  <djweitzner@w3.org>
> http://www.w3.org/People/Weitzner.html
> 
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-patent-policy-20010816/#sec-defs-RF
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Eben Moglen" <moglen@columbia.edu>
> To: <www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org>
> Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2001 8:16 PM
> Subject: W3C patent policy
> 
> 
> > I write on behalf of the Free Software Foundation to oppose the
> > the W3C's adoption of a patent-friendly standards policy.
> >
> > The World Wide Web cannot exist as a global and uniformly-available
> > facility of human society without free software.  Apache, Perl
> > PHP--and literally hundreds of other immediately recognizable aspects
> > of web technology--have been outgrowths of the free software
> > production model.  Without free software, the web would be a
> > commercialized outgrowth of a few proprietary software producers, and
> > it would be incapable of serving, as it now does, as a force for
> > global egalitarianism.
> >
> > Because the Web employs no technology not based around completely open
> > standards, software implementing every single facility of Web life can
> > be produced in the free software model, and is therefore available for
> > free modification and improvement all over the world, supplied at the
> > marginal cost of distribution to any programmer--no matter how
> > financially constrained--who wishes to produce new facilities and
> > opportunities for users.
> >
> > "Reasonable and non-discriminatory" licensing of patented technology
> > embodied in W3C standards will eliminate free software production from
> > any area of Web facilities subject to those standards.  Such standards
> > will therefore provide a basis to "embrace and extend" the Web under
> > proprietary control, excluding competition from free software,
> > limiting technical innovation and risking the social utility of the
> > Web.
> >
> > W3C standards should not incorporate any patented technology.  If
> > patented technology is, for whatever reason, absolutely necessary to
> > the articulation of Web standards, only such patents should be
> > considered for inclusion as are licensed under terms compatible with
> > section 7 of the GNU General Public License (GPL), which is the
> > worldwide standard in free software licensing.  Patents licensed
> > compatibly with GPL can be practiced without royalty or recordkeeping
> > obligations, and are thus useful in software that any user can modify
> > or redistribute.  The W3C patent policy should not be RAND, it should
> > be GPL.
> >
> > --
> >  Eben Moglen                       voice: 212-854-8382
> >  Professor of Law                    fax: 212-854-7946       moglen@
> >  Columbia Law School, 435 West 116th Street, NYC 10027     columbia.edu
> >  General Counsel, Free Software Foundation
> http://moglen.law.columbia.edu
> >
> 
>

Received on Monday, 1 October 2001 21:02:28 UTC