- From: Rufus Polson <dpolson@sfu.ca>
- Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2001 14:23:30 -0700
- To: www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org
Hello. I would like to add my voice to the many protesting the idea of so-called RAND licensing--but I would also like to point out some potential ramifications for the W3C as an organization. The reasons why RAND licensing is a poor idea have been pointed out by people with a more effortless grasp of the issues than I, and many have also objected strenuously to what appears to be an attempt to slip highly important alterations to the nature of what can be considered a standard by without anyone noticing until it is too late. I will just note that I agree with these objections very forcefully, and move on. In Canada, we have an item in our constitution which outlaws actions by the judiciary which bring the administration of justice into disrepute. It is a vague stricture, but an important one. The rule of law depends on respect for its operations--if that respect is lost, there are armed men to fall back on, but the legitimacy of the process is gone. This is the point at which a country ceases to be a polity with the consent of the governed, and becomes oppressive rulership. A standards body occupies a position similar to that of a judiciary, with one exception: A standards body has no armed men to fall back on. Its authority consists solely in being generally accepted as such. The moment this general acceptance is gone, the standards body becomes not merely illegitimate, but irrelevant; its standards cease to be standards. Its pronouncements are no longer listened to. And once that happens, the body will inevitably wither away, perhaps to leave mere anarchy in its wake, perhaps to be replaced by some other body that can persuade implementors of its legitimacy. The RAND licensing scheme represents a crisis for the W3C; if the W3C accepts this idea, it will at that moment have made a crucial beginning to the process of undermining general acceptance of its standards. It will have begun the slide to irrelevance in a way difficult to back out of, like an insect stepping into an attractive-looking pitcher plant. I strongly urge the W3C to maintain their reputation and their honour by refraining from taking this step. Rufus Polson "Our mountains are very pointy, our prairies are not The rest is kind of bumpy, but man do we have a lot!" --Arrogant Worms, 'Canada's really big'
Received on Sunday, 30 September 2001 17:23:33 UTC