- From: Tod Harter <tharter@giantelectronicbrain.com>
- Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2003 15:02:37 -0500
- To: www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org
This is a horrible idea. It means that any organization that wishes to can EMBRACE AND EXTEND any standard they own a patent on a part of. In essence they give out a free license to use 'Open Foo Protocol V1.0' but what happens when everyone decides they need 'Secure Open Foo Protocol'? Then they're all at the mercy of the patent holder, who hasn't licensed their technology for THAT use. One can come up with other similar scenarios as well. Essentially the end result is that holders of these patents can control when and where the GPL or similar licenses can be applied. Another objection is that it is not at all clear that GPL is compatible with this sort of mechanism. Suppose 'Free Foo' wants to use the 'Open Foo Protocol'. It would link to code which would be ENCUMBERED by this patent restriction. This would require at least a codicile to the license, which would have to be approved by ALL the owners of the project. Projects such as the Linux Kernel have no clear ownership. 1000's of people have rights to code contained within them. There is no reasonable way that such a project could ever incorporate patented restricted-use code. The W3C has historically stood for the concept that standards impose no barriers to competition. It needs to stay that way. -- Tod Harter Giant Electronic Brain http://www.giantelectronicbrain.com
Received on Friday, 4 April 2003 16:01:17 UTC