- From: Jesper Juhl <juhl@eisenstein.dk>
- Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2001 10:22:44 +0200
- To: www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org
Here some comments on the wording of the "W3C Patent Policy Framework" (http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-patent-policy-20010816/) proposed by the W3C. In section 2.1 you say: "The second decade of the Web has already demonstrated that patents will be a factor in the ongoing development of the World Wide Web infrastructure. A variety of factors suggest that the Web will be increasingly affected by the patent process." This is true, the web will be affected by patents in some way, but in my oppinion the W3C should work to minimize that effect, and some statement to that effect should be here. In section 5.2 you have this list: " The following two licensing mode choices are available for Working Groups: 1. Reasonable, non-discriminatory terms (RAND) 2. Royalty-free (RF) " If you deside to allow licensing under RAND terms (which I hope you will not), then I suggest that you change the order of the list to list the RF licensing mode first to indicate that it is the prefered licensing mode. In section 7.2 you have the following: "...Disclosure obligations shall not obligate a Member to conduct a search of its patent portfolio. No extraordinary effort is required for patent disclosure requests, nor should such requests be given lower priority than other communication efforts undertaken by the Advisory Committee representative..." I very much dislike the "Disclosure obligations shall not obligate a Member to conduct a search of its patent portfolio" part. We are talking about good faith here. Wouldn't you consider it natural that if you have a patent portfolio that you search it for patents that might be relevant? A members own patent portfolio is the first place the member should look! Regards, Jesper Juhl
Received on Tuesday, 9 October 2001 04:30:06 UTC