- From: Shawn Lindsay <slindsay@ivwnet.com>
- Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2001 16:28:45 -0400
- To: www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org
To whom it may concern: As an ordinary internet user, I must admit that I do not fully understand the implications of the RAND proposal. However, it strikes me as a bad idea, and essential inimical to the w3c's goals of promoting interoperability and common protocols. Quoting from section 4-4 of the PP FAQ: "there are other technologies (typically higher level) where it might be appropriate to accept fee-bearing requirements in a recommendation. NOTE: The W3C is not presently aware of any non-free patent that is essential to any existing W3C recommendation." Whose interests does it serve to change at this time? I invite the proponents of this policy to name those wonderful patent-encumbered internet technologies that we users simply cannot live without. Until those technologies can be named and openly discussed, the w3c should play no part in promoting their use. Surely the w3c must realize that their name is more valuable than the patented formats and protocols of some of its members. Shawn Lindsay.
Received on Sunday, 30 September 2001 16:28:47 UTC