[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: ISO intellectual property (was Standards)
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <email@example.com>
- To: Tom Bradford <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2001 13:48:53 -0500
Yes, I understand copyrights. I own a few.
The text in the W3C document seems to indicate
one cannot make derivatives. "no and no".
>A standard that nobody wants to live by is not a standard at all.
The problem would be when some do and some don't and
but neither can tell who to ask because the authority
is unclear or illegitimate.
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
From: Tom Bradford [mailto:email@example.com]
And I'm saying that if the person produces a document that *IS* the W3C
document with a paragraph added about their little bit, and they're
going to call it HTML 3.2.1, then they're in violation of copyright, but
if I were to write a one paragraph document that describes an addition,
and says to refer to the W3C's HTML specification, then they're not in
violation of copyright. And unless the term HTML is trademarked, they
could even call it HTML++ if they wanted to.