"field of use"
'Field of Use' restriction
[Resend] So nearly there...
[www-patentpolicy-comment] <none>
A response to Microsoft's carefully worded letter
Acacia Research software patent claim for streaming media
adopt royalty-free draft policy
Against Item 3 of Section 3 of the proposed Policy on Patents
Amend Consortium Patent Policy "RF" patent Provision
And about freedom?
Another Comment That Failed to Get Posted
Approval of draft policy on Software Patenting
Approve of draft disapprove of software patenting.
Approve of draft policy - disapprove of software patenting
Approve of draft policy - disapprove of software patenting.
- Michael Spahn (Friday, 17 January)
- Mark Janssen (Thursday, 9 January)
- Lourens Steenkamp (Wednesday, 1 January)
- Christopher Hicks (Tuesday, 31 December)
- Éric Depagne (Monday, 6 January)
- Denis Braekhus (Thursday, 2 January)
- Alexander Schmehl (Tuesday, 31 December)
- Middleton, Michael (Tuesday, 31 December)
- Kevin Caswick (Tuesday, 31 December)
archive system bug
Bug in the proposed draft
Call for Comments: W3C Royalty-Free Patent Policy Last Call Working Draft
Comment
Comment on Clause 3 of Section 3 of draft policy
comment on current draft of W3C patent policy
- Bryan (Monday, 30 December)
Comment on section 3 item 3.
Comment on W3C Royalty-Free Patent Policy
Comment: Free Software Community
Comments about the proposed patent policy
Comments for the 'field of use' restriction in Section 3, Item 3 of proposed W3C patents policy
Comments on 'W3C Royalty-Free Patent Policy Last Call Working Draft'
Comments on Microsoft's views
Comments on patent policy
Comments on the W3C patent policy
Comments on W3C Patents Policy
Comments on W3C Royalty-Free Patent Policy
Comments: the "field of use" restrictions
- DFox (Tuesday, 31 December)
Comments: the "field of use" restrictions in Section 3 Item 3 of the proposed W3C Patents Policy
Comments: W3C Royalty-Free Patent Policy Last Call Working Draft
Disagree with the "field of use" restriction
DISAPPROVE of draft policy
Disapprove of software patents, PERIOD.
Do not accept "field of use" restriction
Draft Patent Policy
Draft Patent Policy Comment
Draft policy approval
Draft policy not ideal but acceptable
Draft policy, good; software patenting, bad
Feedback
Field of use conflict between section 3 item 3 and the GPL
Field of use provision
field of use restrictions must go
final call
FSF position on Section 3
FSF's Position on Proposed W3 Consortium "Royalty-Free" Patent Policy
How free becomes too costly
I believe
I fully support the FSF position on the proposed "Royalty-Free" Patent Policy
I grudgingly approve of the draft policy
I object to the "Royalty-Free" Patent Policy.
In favour of draft policy - against software patenting
Item 3 of Section 3: W3C Royalty-Free (RF) Licensing Requirements
Last Call comment on the patent policy of the W3C
- Myron (Tuesday, 31 December)
Last call working draft comments
Last call: Royalty-Free Patent Policy
Life
- paul (Tuesday, 31 December)
MS views on Last Call Patent Policy Draft
My opinion counts...
No 'field of use' patent restrictions
no limits
no loopholes!
NO on "Royalty-Free Patent Policy"
No software patents!
Objection to "field of use" restriction
objection to field of use restrictions
On W3 Consortium "Royalty-Free" Patent Policy
Open Source Licencing and Patent encumbrance
- Brian (Tuesday, 31 December)
Partially royalty-free patents
Pass W3C Patent Policy
patent policy
Patent Policy - I disapprove of software patents
Patent policy call for comments.
Patent Policy Comments That Failed to Get Posted
Patent policy draft
Patent Policy working draft: RF licensing requirements
patentholders have failed; please fix section 3, items 3 and 7
Please approve draft policy; disapprove of software patents.
Please drop the "Field of Use" clause.
Please ensure patent policy is GPL compliant
Please keep the standards open and patent free
please remove "fields-of-use" restrictions
Prohibit the imposition of "field of use" restrictions on patent claims contributed to W3C standards
Proposed patent Policy problem - i.e. Field of Use clause
Proposed Patient Policy (Section 3 ) / GPL (Section 7)
proposed web standards
Regarding Royalty-Free Patent Policy, sec. 3, item 3
Royalty Free Patent Policy
royalty-free for web-only use is a dangerous and unwise limitation
Royalty-Free Patent Policy
Royalty-Free Patent Policy and the GPL
Royalty-Free Patent Policy correction
Royalty-Free Patent Policy Feedback
Royalty-Free Patent Policy GPL Encumbrance = Bad News
Royalty-Free Patent Policy: Request for Change in Section 3, Item 3
Royalty-free W3C policies
Rutgers and VoiceXML - please do your best _not_ to give Rutgers
SBC Pursuing "RAND" Patent on Website Navigation
Section 3 of proposed patent policy
Section 3 of the W3C's proposed patent policy
Section 3(3) needs to be amended
Section 3, Item 3
Section 3.3
So nearly there...
So-called Patent Policy "bug" of Section 3.3
Some more background info on MS' views
SPI response to Microsoft comment of January 16.
Standardization process à la Microsoft
Standards are . . .
standards must not be subject to patents
Summary of 13 January 2003 Patent Policy Working Group Teleconference
Summary of 16 December 2002 Patent Policy Working Group Teleconference
Summary of 6 January 2003 Patent Policy Working Group Teleconference
Support draft policy; Open Source implementations are essential
The Future of the W3C (Patent Policy)
Urge approval of draft policy
W3 Policy: Up with draft, down with software patents
W3C Draft Policy on Royalty-Free Patents
- D F (Tuesday, 31 December)
W3C Patent Policy Feedback
W3C Royalty-Free Patent Policy Last Call
W3C Royalty-Free Patent Policy Last Call Working Draft Comment
W3C's proposed patent policy
- Slim (Tuesday, 31 December)
W3C's proposed patent policy.
Worried about possible non-approval of draft policy
www patentpolicy comment
Your patent policy problem with free software
Last message date: Thursday, 30 January 2003 14:01:58 UTC