- From: Michael Hartle <mhartle@hartle-klug.com>
- Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2001 15:15:25 +0200
- To: www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org
Dear Sirs, I am against the current working draft of the Patent Policy Framework and the planned "move [...] to an Advisory Committee Review of a Proposed Recommendation draft". It is often stated that software patents are required by firms to protect the efforts spent in research and development. As those firms are in a constant process of gathering state-of-the-art technology, information and experienced personnel, I believe they have earned an advantage regarding commercial application of those techniques that is largely non-transferable. As a consequence of this view, I do not think of most patents as means of a fair way to finance the development, but consider them as potential instruments to control technology and hinder competition, especially those arising from free, open source alternatives that mostly cannot afford legal measures to protect themselves. As free, collaboratively developed open source implementations have helped to build up a basis for todays open standards, the risk of hindering future open source projects and of being left at the pure mercy of those who can afford to establish and pay for patents is against my understanding of the concept of establishing an open standard. Enabling this framework means running the risk of preventing public, free development of standards, but choosing among monopolies build up by W3C Members. Who ensures that royality-free and royality-based licensing modes both remain choices ? Who defines the aspect and value of "reasonable, non-discriminatory royalties or fees" ? Does reasonable mean adequately-priced for different regions like the United States, Europe and Africa ? Who is ensuring the protecting from discrimination by patent holders ? Who controls the aspect and who can issue sanctions when, for example, a Member is testing or stepping beyond the limits ? Will there be any sanctioning at all ? Without adequately addressing these issues, this draft is likely to become an instrument for W3C Members to control markets and competition by means of patents and money. I am a firm believer that an open standard should also contain the freedom of royalities or fees for implementors and subsequent users of this standard. Yours sincerely, Michael Hartle, Hartle & Klug GbR
Received on Tuesday, 2 October 2001 09:20:00 UTC