Re: standarts should be royalty and thus patent free

> If an Advisory Committee Representative to the W3C (each member organisation
> of the W3C has an ACR) fails to respond to requests for
> patent disclosures by default "they will commit their Member company to
> license all Essential Claims needed to implement W3C recommendations on
> at least RAND terms. This is true whether any personnel from the Member
> company participates in a WG or not."
> This means oversight, negligence or perhaps deception is rewarded by
> requiring the commitment to a RAND license rather than a royalty-free
> one."

> ...

> Jon Bendtsen

As is clear this is my interpretation based upon the W3C literature.
That interpretation may be wrong. Your Rambus example is good BTW.

Even if my interpretation is subsequently shown to be wrong the fix I
proposed would still stand:

"For members to face a financial incentive to disclose there should
be a deterrent in the form of royalty-free licensing."

This means any oversight by W3C members would not jeopardise the
existing freedom of the standard.

Perhaps the phrase "on at least RAND terms" means the W3C could also
force members to license their technology on royalty-free terms.

But why not take away the oversight incentive completely?


Received on Sunday, 30 September 2001 08:01:34 UTC