"open standards", RAND, RF
"RAND"
"RAND" licensing concerns...
"Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory"
"Reasonable" is a slipperly slope
"Standards" with licensing restrictions disasterous to free software
%20Comment%20on%20Patent%20Policy&In-Reply-To=<20010930165427.IXMU14306.femail26.sdc1.sfba.home.com@there>&References=<20010930165427.IXMU14306.femail26.sdc1.sfba.home.com@there>
* "Standards" with licensing restrictions disasterous to free software * "Standards" with licensing restrictions disasterous to free software
[Fwd: [fairuse] My letter to the W3C: Please do not allow any W3C standard to beencumbered by patents.]
[OT] W3C and the Promotion of Fee-based Standards for the Web
[www-patentpolicy-comment] <none>
- Masatake E. Hori (Monday, 1 October)
- Gardner Neely (Monday, 1 October)
- Miguel Angel López (Saturday, 29 September)
- Kristoffer Ekelund (Sunday, 30 September)
- pbs (Sunday, 30 September)
- Christopher Hicks (Sunday, 30 September)
- Shad Van Den Hul (Sunday, 30 September)
- Patrick Lioi (Sunday, 30 September)
- oscar (Sunday, 30 September)
- Aschwin van der Woude (Sunday, 30 September)
- Gerald Lane (Thursday, 27 September)
A comment on RAND...
A complete reversal of policy
A few further points
A good hit to the open & free nature of web development
A question
A terrible idea
About standards and limitations
About the RAND license
Accepting for-fee-patents is a VERY bad idea
Adoption of recommendations
Advice to lengthen the time to respond to the RAND licencing issue
Against a patent encumbered internet.
against accomodating patents
Against new rules
Against patent policy changes
against patent-fees in w3c standards
Against patented standards
Against patents
Against Patents in Standards
Against proposals for RAND Licensing
Against RAND
Against RAND proposal
against reasonable licensing
AGAINST THIS PROPOSAL!
Against W3 PATENT POLICY
against w3 patents
Against W3C Patent Policy (RAND)
All Recommendations should be royalty-free
Allowance of RAND in standards
Allowing patents in software standards is a mistake
Allowing patents in Standards is the antithesis of the W3C charter
Allowing Patents==bad
and what about the penny-less student?
Anti-User RAND Licensing Policy
Any fee is discriminatory
apologies for posting twice by accident
Appalling
Atrong opposition
Backdoor attempt to banish Open-Source from the Web?
Bad bad bad idea
Bad changes in policies
Bad Idea
Brief words regarding RAND, capital, and non-capital economies
change in standards policy
Comment
Comment on "reasonable and non-discriminatory" patent system
Comment on draft W3C Patent Policy Framework
Comment on inclusion of patented technologies in standards: JUST SAY NO!
Comment on patent policy
Comment on patent policy proposal
Comment on proposed "RAND" policy
Comment on proposed patent policy
Comment on proposed patent policy change
Comment on RAND
Comment on RAND and RF type licencing
Comment on RAND patent implementation
Comment on RAND policy
Comment on RAND policy proposal
Comment on the proposed patent policy change
Comment re. allowing patented technologies
Comment Submission for the W3C's Patent Policy Group
Comment to W3C Patent Policy Draft
Comment: Against.
Commentary on Patent Policy
Comments
Comments about Fee-based Standards for the Web
comments against
Comments for WD-patent-policy-20010816
comments on patented and proprietary "standards"
Comments on proposed patent policy
Comments on proposed W3 patent policy
Comments on RAND
Comments on RAND licensing.
Comments on the draft.
Comments On The W3C Patent Policy Framework Draft
comments on the working draft
Comments on your Patent Policy
comments on: W3C Considers Royalty-Bound Patents In Web Standards
Comments re: http://www.w3.org/2001/08/16-PP-FAQ.html
Comments Regarding RAND Wroking draft
- VanL (Sunday, 30 September)
Commercial impact of the proposed W3C patent policy.
Commment on patent changes
Concerns about future fees for already implemented standards.
concerns about new RAND licensing
Concerns about RAND licensing terms
Concerns regarding RAND licensing.
Concerns with implementing patented technology in W3C standard
Consideration of Patented Standards
Corporate Power Grabs
Corporate product lines as "standards"
Crass Stupidity
dangerous development
Dear Sirs/Madams
Death of the W3C
Deeply concerned about the possible change of accepted IPR policy
Disgust in proposed changes to W3C policy
Dissent and comment
Disturbing
Do Not Adopt The Patent Policy
Do not adopt the RAND policy. It will kill the W3C
Do not allow "RAND" patents to pollute W3C standards
do NOT allow non royalty free patents into W3C standards
Do not allow patents into w3c standards
Document contradicts own goals
Does W3C yearn for the bad old days...?
Don't change policy.
Don't destroy the open web!
Don't do it!
Don't do RAND
Don't even think about it
Don't include patented technology in W3C standards!
Effect on Mozilla etc
Even current standards are not safe!
Even the idea is absurd...
EXCELLENT... Everything is falling into place! <HAHAHahahahaha....>
failure to communicate
Fairness
Fee based web standard
- john (Sunday, 30 September)
Fee-based Standards
Fee-based standards for the web
Fee-bound patents
- dan (Sunday, 30 September)
Fee-Bound W3C Standards
Fighting for the right for free information exchange
Final Comment
For shame!
FREEDOM!
FUCKING UNBELIEVABLE
FYI posting inspired by IP note
How could W3C even THINK of such a thing?
I am against this policy
I am appalled
I am concerned about allowing RAND licensing
I believe RAND is a bad idea
I concur with Alan Cox
I do not agree with RAND
I don't agree.
- Luke (Sunday, 30 September)
I don't like the RAND license
I hope you know wath you are doing.
I hope you realise
I implore you not to leave Opensource behind!
I object to RAND
I oppose RAND
I oppose the W3C's proposed change in patent policy.
I say "NO!" to RAND
I strongly object to the proposed policy of allowing patented technologies to be used in W3C standards definition
I will have to look for other standard bodies
I'm horrified.
If it ain't broke... don't fix it.
If you start patenting the web,
Ill-Advised Patent Policy
IMHO: Patents have no place in W3C
Impact on existing WG's
Implementing RAND would be the death of W3C
In opposition to RAND licenses
incorporating patented technology in W3 standards
Incorporating patented technology in W3C standards is a bad idea
Is it time for GNU standarts organization?
It doesn't make sense, it isn't fair, and it's regressive
It is so sad to see the W3C go
It's so simple: We need a new W3C
Just say "no" to patents.
Just say No to RAND! (and RF)
Just say no!
Keep patent policy as it is (please)
Keep patented technologies out of W3C standards
Keep pay-for-play patents from the W3C
Keep the standards patent-free
Keep the web open
Leaving the W3C
Les brévets et les standarts
- Oleg (Sunday, 30 September)
Let's stick together!
licensing
Loosening requirements for patented technologies
LT: \"But we posted it\"
LT: NO to RAND Proposal
- T.D. (Sunday, 30 September)
LT: NO to W3C RAND Proposal
Microsoft patenting the WWW ???
Money will do more to destroy the web the goverments.
MS attempt to kill Open Source projects
my name and other matters
My opinion on new policy
My opinion on the RAND proposal
My vote is against
Negative Comments
new patent policy
new RAND licensing model comments
new royalty based standard
NO
No good can come of this. Please reject this proposal!
No longer "world-wide"?
No matter what, make RAND free for Free Open Source software
NO NO NO
No No No. Remember what W3C stands for
NO Patents
No patents as standards ...
No patents for W3C technology.
NO patents in standards
No Patents in Standards Please!
No patents, please!
No proprietary standards
no RAND
No RAND standards
- Paul (Sunday, 30 September)
No RAND, please!
No room for patents in standards
No Software Patents
No to fee-based standards
NO to new RAND proposal!
- david (Sunday, 30 September)
NO TO PATENT STANDARDS.
No to Patents, Yes to Discrimination
NO to proposed RAND patent policy
No to RAND
No to RAND license
NO to RAND patents
No to RAND policy
No to RAND!
No to RAND!!!!
No Web Patents!
no!
No.
No. This opens the door to corruption.
Nobility in Web Standards
Non-discriminatory licensing
non-free standards
non-royalty-free licensing
noncommercial perspective
Nooooooooooooooo!
Objection to patent policy
Objection to RAND licencing scheme
Objections to proposed patent policy
Objections to RAND provision of the Patent Policy Framework
Objections to RAND.
Objections to the Working Draft
On Allowing RAND licensing to be used by W3C standards
On the proposed patent policy of the W3C
One World, One Web, One Program......No W3C
Open and Free
Open Source Exclusion by Any Royalty Based Patents
Open Source will RANDel your heads!
Open Standards x Patents
Open, shared technology, not patents
Opinion on the RAND license
oppose RAND
Opposed to new draft of policy
opposed to non-free standards
Opposed to Patent Policy
Opposed To Patents In Web Standards
Opposed to proposed patent policy
opposed to RAND
Opposed to RAND patents in W3C standards
opposed to w3c patent-friendly policy
Opposition to Patent Policy
Opposition To Rand
paid royalties for standards which use patents
pateneted IP standards
patent ? no royalty-free license ?
Patent and Standards
Patent encumbered standards squelch innovation
Patent encumbrance of standards unwise in international relations
patent free web
Patent owners should fend for themselves.
Patent Policy
- Chris Leyon (Monday, 1 October)
- Mark Tearle (Monday, 1 October)
- Will Janoschka (Monday, 1 October)
- Paul Logston (Monday, 1 October)
- D Tuinstra (Monday, 1 October)
- beasley (Monday, 1 October)
- Damien Miller (Monday, 1 October)
- Ron Nath (Sunday, 30 September)
- Nathan Tuck (Sunday, 30 September)
- Cameron Kellough (Sunday, 30 September)
- Josef Schneider (Sunday, 30 September)
- Hilmar Berger (Sunday, 30 September)
- Jo Dillon (Monday, 1 October)
- Tom Hinton (Sunday, 30 September)
- Chris Woodard (Sunday, 30 September)
- Nicu Pavel (Sunday, 30 September)
- Byron Como (Sunday, 30 September)
- reed mideke (Sunday, 30 September)
- prhodes@vdsinc.com (Sunday, 30 September)
- Joyce Conklin (Sunday, 30 September)
- Jeremy Beaumont (Sunday, 30 September)
- Ben Reser (Sunday, 30 September)
- Chris F.A. Johnson (Sunday, 30 September)
- Pawel Krawczyk (Sunday, 30 September)
- Jeff Rafter (Sunday, 30 September)
- tres (Sunday, 30 September)
- The Plumblys (Sunday, 30 September)
- Julian Regel (Sunday, 30 September)
- David Magda (Sunday, 30 September)
- Shawn Starr (Sunday, 30 September)
- Sara Yurman (Sunday, 30 September)
- Artur Skura (Sunday, 30 September)
- ray hartman (Sunday, 30 September)
- Chris McDonough (Sunday, 30 September)
Patent policy - RAND may be misguided
patent policy : chilling effect of RAND
Patent Policy and Free Internet
Patent Policy and Free Internet (Rev.1)
Patent Policy Change
patent policy comment
patent policy comments
Patent policy draft severely flawed
Patent Policy Framework
Patent Policy: bad for everybody except big biz
Patented recommendations
Patented software
- fdsa (Sunday, 30 September)
Patented standard = oxymoron. A thousand times NO!!!
patented standards
Patented standards = stifling innovation
Patented standards == damage
patented technologies in W3C standards
Patented technologies inclusion in W3C standards
Patenting Standards
patentpolicy
patentpolicy comment
patents
Patents & W3C standards
Patents and royalties are the antithesis of the Web's openness
Patents and standards are mutually exclusive
Patents and the W3C
Patents and the W3C - NO !
Patents are dangerous to open standards
- Chris (Sunday, 30 September)
patents are evil
Patents aren't standar
Patents can become an obstacle to free development/free world
Patents in W3C recommendations
Patents in W3C standards? Egad.
Patents in W3C technical documents
Patents in web standards
patents in your standards
Patents on W3C Standards
Patents only use if completely free and unrestricted
Patents should not have a place in the standards process!
Patents Will Interfere With Existing Market-Driven Processes
Patents would stunt evolution of the web
Permit _ONLY_ royalty-free working groups in the W3C!
Please avoid patented standards, even "RAND"
Please do not allow any W3C standard to be encumbered by patents.
Please do not allow patented standards
Please do not allow RAND licenses
Please do not encumber our standards with patents
Please do NOT incorporate RAND licensed technology in your recommendations
Please do not loosen W3C patent restrictions.
Please don't
Please don't allow patents into standards
Please don't allow patents to monopolize SW / the web.
please don't do it
Please don't do it.
Please don't do this
Please don't undo the good the W3C has achieved.
Please extend the comment deadline
Please extend the comment period
Please keep patents out of standards!
Please keep the web OPEN
Please keep the WWW free
Please keep web standards royalty free
Please let webstandards be freely implementable by ALL
Please reconsider
Please reconsider RAND patent policy...
Please reconsider this course of action
Please remember PNG, and do not allow RAND to become policy
Please say no to patented tech
Please say NO to royalty-bound patents for the web!
Please! No royalty-based standards!
Please, No
Please, no patented material in W3C standards
Please, reject RAND
Policy vs. mechanism
Proposal to allow patent-bound WWW standards
Proposed Changes in W3C patent policy
Proposed changes to patent policy
Proposed move to fee based standards
Proposed new RAND Policy
Proposed Patent Policy
Proposed patent policy destroys W3C mission
Proposed Patent Pollicy Framework
Proposed RAND licensing model - AGAINST
Proposed RAND Licensing Terms
Proposed RAND Policy
Proposed W3C Change on Patent Policy
Proposed W3C Patent Policy
Proprietary standards.
Protest
Public comment
Public Comment RAND
Public comment system flawed, deadline should be extended
RAD working draft
RAND
- E L Tonkin (Monday, 1 October)
- Tim Holy (Monday, 1 October)
- Mats Palmgren (Monday, 1 October)
- Frederick R. Hanhisalo (Monday, 1 October)
- Nathan (Sunday, 30 September)
- KevinO (Sunday, 30 September)
- shane (Sunday, 30 September)
- Zavier Sheran (Sunday, 30 September)
- Glenn Crocker (Sunday, 30 September)
- Greer Pedoe (Sunday, 30 September)
- Shawn Lindsay (Sunday, 30 September)
- Lars Forseth (Sunday, 30 September)
- Theo de Raadt (Sunday, 30 September)
- Justin H. (Sunday, 30 September)
- John Helms (Sunday, 30 September)
- Dan (Sunday, 30 September)
- Sean Borman (Sunday, 30 September)
- Dr. Andrew Eric Mossberg (Sunday, 30 September)
- Roy Barling (Sunday, 30 September)
- Eric Fletcher (Sunday, 30 September)
- Jean-Pierre Demailly (Sunday, 30 September)
- Harold Riggs (Sunday, 30 September)
RAND & intellectual property
RAND & W3C
RAND (www patent policy) standards
RAND -- "Whoops, you owe us royalties!"
RAND = W3C suicide
RAND => effectively proprietary standard
RAND and OSS
RAND and patents have no place on the WEB!!!
RAND and the W3C Patent Policy
RAND Bad
RAND clause and W3C's mission
RAND comment
Rand Comments
- Susan (Monday, 1 October)
RAND Concerns
RAND considered harmful
RAND et al
RAND Hurts Everyone
RAND initiative
RAND is a bad idea
RAND is bad for everyone
RAND is bad for the Web
RAND is Discriminatory.
RAND is not acceptable
RAND is problematic
RAND licences: don\'t act unresponsibly and cowardly
RAND Licencing
RAND license
RAND license *is* discriminatory...
RAND License acceptance
RAND license and the future of the web
RAND License Garbage
RAND license is effectively impossible
RAND license sucks
RAND license terms are rediculous!
RAND licenseing comment
RAND Licenses
RAND licensing
- Forrest Sweasy (Sunday, 30 September)
- Neil Kandalgaonkar (Sunday, 30 September)
- Robin Mead (Sunday, 30 September)
- James Arthurs (Sunday, 30 September)
- Grant Robinson (Sunday, 30 September)
- Christer O. Andersson (Sunday, 30 September)
- Jim Flynn (Sunday, 30 September)
- bigzirk@mac.com (Sunday, 30 September)
- Gavriel State (Sunday, 30 September)
- Jerry Davis (Sunday, 30 September)
- Tony O'Bryan (Sunday, 30 September)
- Volker Hett (Sunday, 30 September)
- Levi (Sunday, 30 September)
- mark@otford.kent.btinternet.co.uk (Sunday, 30 September)
RAND licensing against opennes of the world wide web
RAND licensing and open source software
RAND licensing and the future of W3C
RAND licensing and WWW standards - another vote against this atrocity
RAND Licensing Concerns
RAND licensing inappropriate for web technologies
RAND licensing is a bad idea
RAND Licensing is a terrible mistake
RAND LICENSING IS BAD -- will do all I can to stop it
RAND licensing model
RAND Licensing Model -- bad.
RAND licensing of "patented standards" will kill the web
RAND licensing policy
RAND licensing scheme
RAND licensing: bad proposal, insufficient consultation
RAND not appropriate for the Web.
RAND objection
RAND only promotes big companies agenda
RAND Patent Policy
RAND Patents in Standards? NO!
Rand policies
RAND policy
RAND policy change
RAND proposal
RAND proposal for WWW.
RAND proprosal
RAND risks to set W3.org out of play
RAND standards
RAND uglyness
RAND versus freedom
RAND W3C
RAND Will Discredit W3C
RAND will hurt the W3C and the Internet.
RAND will kill the Web
RAND Would Destroy W3C
RAND would stifle innovation and hurt consumer choice
RAND, Accessibility, and the Digital Divide
RAND: Friend or foe ? (or is w3c just abolishing themself)
RAND: hat about everyone else?
RAND: Sounds like a disaster in the making...
RAND: Working Group comment requested
RAND: Wrong!
RAND? please just don't.
Re RAND licensing
Redundancy of any comment
Reflection
Regarding RAND license...
Regarding the patent policy recommendation.
Regarding the RAND license...
Reject RAND proposal
Reject this proposal
Remember the browser wars? Now, apply RAND..
Resistance is not futile.
Response to RAND - negative
response to your proposal
RF > RAMMED * Deadline extension? * W3C should serve the PUBLIC interest
RF and RAND licencing
Royalties and the W3C
Royalties in patents used in standards
Royalty bound patents in web standards
royalty free standards
royalty free standards only, please
Royalty-Bound Patents
Royalty-Bound Patents in Web Standards
Royalty-Free should be required
royalty-free standards needed
Say No to RAND
Sell out covered up by NewSpeak
Serious issues of concern about internet patents
Serious problems
Shameless attempt to commercialise the standards process
Should drop RAND, or re-open public discussion
Sickening
simple analysis
So much for an independant body
Some thoughts about standards (short)
Speech freedom menaced
standarts should be royalty and thus patent free
Stop Software Patents!
stop them from crashing the RAND fee plane on the free software towers
Stop This
Strong Objections to Proposals
Strongly disagree with proposal to allow non-royalty-free standards
strongly opposed to W3C endorsing non-royalty-free standards
Strongly Opposed to W3C RAND patents
Submarine patents
Thanks A Lot, Folks
- Tim (Sunday, 30 September)
The closing of open standards.
The concept of RAND is in itself discriminatory
The idea stinks.
The Internet must remain free (gratis and libre)
The Internet was developed for the Free exchange of Information - not big business
The Internet: for citizens as well as commerce?
The new W3C patent related policy seems a bad thing
The patent-policy change (RAND)
The Patented Internet
The policy change with respect to patents (RAND)
the promotion of fee base standards.
The proposal about allowing patents on W3C standards would take away the value of these.
The proposal is very harmful
The proposed policy is bad news
The RAND
The RAND conflicts with the philosophy of the internet
the shift in the position of the W3C on patented standards.
The W3C is dead
There is no need for this.
Think ahead
This is a bad policy
This is Appalling
This is not a good idea
This isn't necessary. I mean the W3C, that is. This patent hoopla raises legitimate issues about the viability of the W3C
This policy is wrong
This will make the W3C be spammers!!!
true standards do not allow patented material
Turning out the light...
Unbelievably bad.
Universal freedom of expression
Unquantifiable Liability ? An Objection to the Patent Proposal
Use of propietary standard. PLEASE, DONT DO!
utterly wrong
Very bad news
Vote NO on RAND Patents
W3 Patent policy
W3-patentpolicy
W3C "RAND" Patent Policy Framework draft
W3C - Please preserve the Web!
W3C - turning it's back on the reasons that the Internet has thrived?
w3c accepting patented technology as standards
W3C and patents
W3C and the Promotion of Fee-based Standards for the Web
W3C appointing Microsoft, Apple, HP & Phillips to dig it's grave
W3C betrayal of principles
w3c creating its own competition
W3C is a pawn in an IT Cartel
w3c nonsense
- steve (Sunday, 30 September)
W3C patent policy
- Margaret Leber (Monday, 1 October)
- Gary C (Monday, 1 October)
- Simon Hill (Monday, 1 October)
- Eben Moglen (Monday, 1 October)
- Tim Sweeney (Sunday, 30 September)
- Jerry Clabaugh (Sunday, 30 September)
- Peter Kelly (Sunday, 30 September)
- Gerhard Poul (Sunday, 30 September)
- Jerry Dennany (Sunday, 30 September)
- Paul R. Ganci (Sunday, 30 September)
- gricard@mac.com (Sunday, 30 September)
- Chavous P. Camp (Sunday, 30 September)
- Barry Dorrans (Sunday, 30 September)
- Chavous P. Camp (Sunday, 30 September)
- Chuck Mead (Sunday, 30 September)
- Cay Horstmann (Sunday, 30 September)
W3C Patent Policy : What a pity !
W3C Patent Policy Comment
W3C Patent Policy Framework
W3C Patent Policy Framework - bad move
W3C Patent Policy Framework Comment
W3C Patent Policy Framework Proposal
W3C Patent Policy: Bad bad bad!
W3C Patent Policy: Bad for the W3C, bad for business, bad for users
- Vox (Sunday, 30 September)
- Lars Eilebrecht (Sunday, 30 September)
- Jesper Juhl (Saturday, 29 September)
- Frode Sørmo (Sunday, 30 September)
- Rodent of Unusual Size (Sunday, 30 September)
- Martin Hamilton (Sunday, 30 September)
- mcnill@talk21.com (Sunday, 30 September)
- Ben Ford (Sunday, 30 September)
- Bruce Krysiak (Sunday, 30 September)
- D. Hugh Redelmeier (Sunday, 30 September)
- Dave Clendenan (Sunday, 30 September)
- Clark C . Evans (Sunday, 30 September)
- Alan Cox (Sunday, 30 September)
W3C Patent Policy: Bad for W3C, bad for business, bad for users
W3C Patent Policy: NO
W3C Patent Policy: W3C and the Promotion of Fee-based Standards for the Web
W3C Patents -----> Monopoly Control
W3C propsed patent policy
W3C RAND proposed recommendation...
W3C Responds
W3C ridiculous new policy on patents
- Krux (Sunday, 30 September)
W3C Working Draft 16 August 2001
W3C's Patent policy
W3C: Thank you for RAND licensing policy!
W3C: why are you fighting against your old friends?
Web standards should be patent free
Web standards should be patent-free
What a joke you've become W3C.
What a shame. Bad shift. Ill fight against it
What are you *thinking*?!?!
What are you guys smoking?
What part of "Free" or "open" don't you understand?
What's wrong? These companies can't compete on their own.
Who pays?
Why I Discourage Patented Standards
- Sean (Sunday, 30 September)
Why Tim Berners-Lee is against the RAND
Will we choose profits at the expense of our students?
World Wide Web is International
World Wide Web, RAND, and people without a lot of money
Wow
WTC wasn't enough?
WWW death
WWW_Under_Attack
Yikes!
You said it better than I can
Your Utter Arrogance is Showing
Last message date: Sunday, 30 September 2001 23:57:46 UTC