- From: Samuel Bayer <sam@sambayer.com>
- Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2001 13:43:13 -0400 (EDT)
- To: www-voice@w3.org
All - In my professional capacity at the MITRE Corporation, I lead a team working on infrastructure for advanced research in spoken dialogue systems. As a result, I have had the opportunity to review the VoiceXML 2.0 proposal as it was developed, since my team has a representative on the W3C Voice Browsers committee. I expect that we will address our technical concerns as a group; but that's not why I'm writing. I mention this only because some small subset of readers might recognize my name, and I want to make it clear that I'm not writing in a professional capacity. What follows is my personal opinion. Whatever the technical value of the VoiceXML 2.0 specification might be, the patent claims made by the committee members render the specification unfit to be a W3C standard. I am aware that the W3C is debating this issue even as we speak, and it's possible that the VoiceXML 2.0 specification may be one of the first test cases for whatever policy the W3C adopts. Even the possibility of granting standard status to proposals for which "reasonable, nondiscriminatory" fees may be charged due to patent claims would be anathema without the US Patent Office's lunatic softheadedness about software patents. If the W3C, which is supposed to be a world-wide consortium, surrenders to this sort of insanity, the result will be that the rest of the world will suffer due to the pressure imposed by illegitimate intellectual rights claims carelessly endorsed by the US government. As I'm sure many others will point out, "reasonable, nondiscriminatory" fees will rule out open source implementations. Imagine where the world would be if the processes of email delivery or HTTP were subject to "reasonable, nondiscriminatory" fees: no sendmail freeware, no Apache freeware. SQL? No Postgres, no mSQL, no MySQL. And so on. The computing world would be a different, substantially more impoverished place. Granting standard status to a patent-encumbered specification is tatamount to granting the patent holder a license to print money. The W3C will demean itself in the eyes of millions if it does this. VoiceXML 2.0 should not be a standard for that reason alone. Samuel Bayer
Received on Wednesday, 24 October 2001 13:58:48 UTC