- From: Federico Heinz <fheinz@vialibre.org.ar>
- Date: 24 Oct 2001 13:02:32 -0300
- To: www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org
Maybe many of the objections raised in this forum could be appeased by a more precise definition of the meaning of the word "reasonable" in this particular context. One can easily imagine terms that are "reasonable" when the licensee is a large corporation, but become prohibitive for free software developers. Maybe the W3C could specify that, to be considered reasonable, the license terms must grant the same rights as royalty-free license, but may require payment of a fee than cannot exceed a given percentage of the expected monetary return from the sale of restricted-use licenses of the resulting program. This way, RAND and RF become equivalent for free software developers, who release their programs under licenses that make that specific return equal to zero. Federico Heinz
Received on Wednesday, 24 October 2001 11:58:40 UTC