- From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
- Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 00:08:07 -0600 (MDT)
- To: www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org
Nathan Cochrane quoted Janet Daly, a W3C representative, thus: W3C also recognises that software patents exist (and patent issues have become more prevalent with the growth of the Web), and ignoring them will do more harm than good. W3C is working hard to reach consensus in an area where there is an obvious tension, and to strike a balance among diverse interests. If this quotation is accurate, it represents a deep misunderstanding, both of what we are asking for, and of how a responsible civic-minded organization should conduct itself in regard to software patents. We are not asking the W3C to ignore software patents, any more than we ignore them. Quite the contrary: we call on the W3C to defend free software from the assault of patent holders. Free software built the web and helped created the need for the W3C; now certain businesses seek to prohibit our work, and ask you to help. I hope that you will feel honor-bound to reject such a request. To cure the problem of software patents requires federal legislation, which neither we nor you can bring about unilaterally. What you can do, directly, is to reduce the influence of software patents over use of the Internet, by refusing to standardize on protocols or formats that are obstructed by patents for any generally important purpose. In so doing, you can also help strengthen the call for changes in patent law to exclude programs from the scope of patents, and thus contribute to a long-term solution. Balance between interests is a natural goal when all the interests are legitimate, but software patents are illegitimate, unfair to software developers. Rather than giving weight to the interests of software patent holders, we should resist and oppose them. Consensus is a worthwhole goal in resolving disagreements, but there can be no consensus involving free software developers on a plan that would exclude free software from some important standard. If you want to find consensus, you need to look in a different place.
Received on Thursday, 4 October 2001 02:08:09 UTC