- From: Steve Smith <sgs@aginc.net>
- Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2001 20:20:23 -0400
- To: www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org
Don't do it. A "standards body" publishes standards for the good of the users. An "industry consortium" publishes standards for the good of its members, not necessarily the users. Allowing RAND-licensed patents to be required parts of a W3C "standard" moves the W3C out of the "standards body" column and into the "industry consortium" column. As a consultant on networking matters, I have to advise my clients about which technologies they can rely on to meet their business objectives with a minimum of unpleasant surprises. I rely heavily on standards-based, royalty-free solutions as one of my main tools in this. I assure you, I will never recommend the use of a W3C standard that has RAND licensing. Hard experience (the LZW patents, for example) has shown that "reasonable and non-discriminatory" licensing is anything but. Basically, any company that is too small to have a full-time IP legal staff will be frozen out of any development. The main purpose of this recommendation seems to be to support Microsoft's jihad against Open Source software. If it goes through, I quite confidently expect "serious" Web standards work to migrate rather quickly to the IETF. -- Steve Smith sgs@aginc.net Agincourt Computing http://www.aginc.net "Truth is stranger than fiction because fiction has to make sense."
Received on Sunday, 30 September 2001 20:22:54 UTC