- From: Glenn Randers-Pehrson <glennrp@home.com>
- Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2001 08:47:43 -0400
- To: www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org
I support Chris Lilley's suggestions, in particular his third suggestion that a W3C Recommendation in which there are IP claims should contain comments on the claims. SVG is being mentioned as the precedent for RAND licensing in W3C Recommendations. I would like to point out that there was no mention of RAND licensing in the last version of SVG for which public comment was invited, namely http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/CR-SVG-20001102/ RAND licensing was first mentioned, to my knowledge, in the July 19 2001 version, http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/PR-SVG-20010719/ for which comments were only invited from W3C membership, and which was approved as a W3C Recommendation on September 5. After looking carefully at the SVG specification, I cannot figure out whether it is possible or not to write a non-infringing implementation of the spec. I am not a lawyer. Also, it's a bit alarming that most of the IP statements that promise RF licensing have conditioned it upon RF licensing by all other Working Group members, which didn't happen. Glenn Randers-Pehrson (PNG, MNG, libpng, pngcrush, ImageMagick)
Received on Wednesday, 3 October 2001 08:50:32 UTC