- From: Andy Chase <andy@greyledge.net>
- Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 09:55:46 -0700 (PDT)
- To: www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org
I have been developing web pages for nearly six years now, and I have always done my best to adhere to the W3C's standards as closely as the browser technology of the day will allow. I've always admired the W3C's role in quietly and impartially guiding the development of the web with clear, open standards. It was with some alarm, then, that I read the Patent Policy Framework draft. I am fully in favor of software developers and companies receiving recognition for their intellectual property, but for an organization founded to create open standards for the web to begin including patented technologies as part of those standards is a grave conflict of interest; you can't have your cake and eat it too. If the door is opened for patented technologies requiring license fees to be incorporated into W3C recommendations, where does it end? Corporations will begin aggressively lobbying the W3C just as they do in Washington, and we'll wind up with companies like Microsoft forcing their proprietary standards like Hailstorm and .NET onto the entire web developer community, Microsoft users or not. I don't want to see the web itself become a victim of the 'Embrace and Extend' phenomenon. Standards should be platform and corporation-agnostic... For a web developer to be forced to pay licensing fees on a certain aspect of their project in order to be W3C compliant would be like forcing an Architect to pay a licensing fee to the company who made his T-Square and ruler in order to be in compliance with the National Institute of Standards Technology. Software patents do exist, yes, and the statement that "ignoring them will do more harm than good" also seems apt, but why isn't it possible to acknowledge software patents without embracing them as an inevitability? Just as with the DMCA and the upcoming SSSCA, large corporations stand to gain a great deal from this proposal if it passes W3C approval, while individual developers stand to gain nothing - in fact, individual developers stand to lose a great deal. "Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory" looks good on paper, but as an individual developer who does a great deal of web development in his spare time, I can honestly state that I don't have the money lying around for any licensing fees that might become a part of a W3C standard. Am I expected to stay behind current development trends at HTML 4.01/XHTML/XML 1.0 because I can't afford to keep up? Please listen to the individual developers... the explosive growth of Linux as both server and desktop environment shows what can happen when developers come together without having to pay any licensing fees for developing and extending the existing code base. For that matter, the explosive growth of the World Wide Web around the W3C's recommendations to date also illustrates this as well! If the W3C is really commited to providing impartial guidance to the development of Web standards, it should not be considering incorporating closed source technologies requiring licensing into those standards. Thank you for the opportunity to contribute my comments - I really want to stay behind the W3C, who laid the groundwork that has enabled me to earn my living as a web designer and developer for the last four years, but I am deeply concerned by this new proposal. Best Regards, -Andy Chase
Received on Tuesday, 2 October 2001 12:44:53 UTC