[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [xml-dev] Let's get real on W3C XForms 1.0 (why it stinks, to day)
- From: Ann Navarro <email@example.com>
- To: PaulT <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Don Park <email@example.com>,firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2001 18:18:05 -0400
At 02:25 PM 10/5/2001 -0700, PaulT wrote:
> > >1) do their best to ensure against patent fringement in our specs
> > >2) disclose patents affecting any W3C activities or forfeit profit from
> > >3) will challenge legally any patent disputes that may arise after
> > >recommendation
> > >4) will deprecate recommendations if patent challenge fails
> > >
> > >I think such a policy will provide reasonable level of protection against
> > >patents in standards.
> > Unfortunately, that's really what they have now, and it clearly hasn't
>If it *clearly* hasn't worked, may I ask for some example?
Nearly every patent claim faced by the W3C.
CSS -- Microsoft participated in the WG - then later claimed "oh, we did
that years ago, we own the patent". Their AC rep claimed no knowledge of
prior claims/property -- did his "best" to disclose.
XPointer - Sun -- "we helped create this, heck, even were primary driving
force in the WG, and "oops", we have a patent on it".
Ann Navarro, WebGeek Inc.
What's on my mind? http://www.snorf.net/blog/
Hooya waling waling wi tiyil!