OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [xml-dev] RAND issues

Oracle has also expressed its support for Royalty Free
and against RAND to the W3C on several occasions during
this debate.
Don Deutsch is our W3C Advisory Committee rep.

Steve Muench - Developer, Product Manager, XML Evangelist, Author
"Building Oracle XML Applications" - www.oreilly.com/catalog/orxmlapp
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Orchard" <orchard@pacificspirit.com>
To: "Tim Bray" <tbray@textuality.com>; <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 7:06 AM
Subject: Re: [xml-dev] RAND issues

| Agreed, and that's pretty much our position as expressed to the w3c.  We 
| need to keep the entry requirements to web services as low as possible, and 
| RF is a key plank in that platform.
| Cheers,
| Dave
| BEA W3C AC rep
| At 12:02 PM 10/4/01 -0700, Tim Bray wrote:
| >I think that those standards which have to live in the
| >space where you might have to pay a toll to use them are
| >precisely those which W3C should stay away from.  Yes they
| >exist - e.g. the IEEE standardizes lots of things which you
| >have to pay patents to use - but the reason the Web is
| >interesting is that anyone can play without having to pay
| >for permission.  I'm not interested in playing RAND games.
| >I'm not interested in a Web where Open-Source efforts are
| >second-class citizens.
| >
| >I think that the W3C should adopt a policy of involving itself
| >only with RF patents, recognize that this is difficult and
| >complicated, and just deal with it.  Tools that are available
| >to achieve this goal include:
| >
| >- requiring diligent search and disclosure from all members,
| >   not just those who participate in particular WGs, for IP
| >   that may stand in the way of some task or another
| >- where such IP exists and the holder isn't willing to grant
| >   RF, changing the standard to work around the IP
| >- use of the bully pulpit and any other leverage the W3C can
| >   bring to bear to make it very painful for anyone who tries to
| >   set up a tollbooth on W3C output
| >- declining to enter standardization activities where it
| >   appears that RF status can't be achieved
| >
| >I think this is very important. -Tim