- From: David Northover <dnorthov@stevens-tech.edu>
- Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2001 19:27:21 -0500
- To: www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org
The proposed RAND policy is a flawed document with no forseeable positive effect on the web. First, the idea of non-discriminatory fees is not upheld by the document itself since, according to part 4.e.4 of the proposed patent policy framework, the license "may be conditioned on a grant of a reciprocal RAND License to all Essential Claims owned or controlled by the licensee and its Affiliates." (http://www.w3.org/TR/patent-policy/#def-RAND) This allows fellow RAND license holders to exempt each other from license fees, leaving the weight of the patents to fall on small companies, who would be handicapped from competing effectively by the several RAND licenses likely to be required for even a simple standard. Furthermore, Any fee is discriminatory against the large body of open-source software that exists and encourages truly universal access. The idea of reasonable fees is also not very clear; and to expose a fee as unreasonable would be a legal issue - likely leading to a drawn out court case, an impracticality for many small companies. Without a set definition of "reasonable" fees, the idea itself becomes impossible to enforce. In addition to the flaws of the proposal, it goes against the very grain of several of the WTC goals (http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Points/): 1. Universal Access - License fees will do little but increase the price, and so decrease the availability, of compatible software, allowing fewer people to gain the resources to access it. 4. Interoperability - While the proposed clause quoted above may encourage some agreement between companies, the allowance of patents will push several companies who do not wish to exchange intellectual property or pay fees to develop competing implementations of portions of the standard, thus defeating any interoperability of the products in the marketplace. 5. Evolvability - Evolving and building on existing standards will become more difficult, as modifications of patented portions may be blocked or delayed by the patent holders seeking to retain income from work in the standard. 6. Decentralization - If RAND fee patents are allowed, the web will become increasingly dependent on specific companies which hold then and thus more centralized around them. Patents were created to encourage innovation by rewarding inventors for making their ideas public; the resulting handicap for consumers was felt to be a productive tradeoff. In this case, the encouragement is unnecessary and counter-productive. The growth of the web - to the benefit of all consumers and all companies, not just a few large ones - has been based on the core, open standards, and hindered by proprietary incompatibilites. Technologies such as streaming media have been slowed in their adoption through a lack of open standards. This proposal would discourage much of the open contribution that has built the web, reducing innovation in addition to handicapping consumers and software designers. I can see no reason to consider this policy change, especially given the short period allowed for public comment. David Northover dnorthov@stevens-tech.edu
Received on Sunday, 30 September 2001 19:25:59 UTC