[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: Jim Ancona <email@example.com>
- To: Ann Navarro <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com,Benjamin Franz <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com
- Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2001 18:50:10 -0700 (PDT)
--- Ann Navarro <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> At 12:07 PM 10/5/2001 -0700, Jim Ancona wrote:
> >But with Benjamin's wording, that wouldn't matter. If the company
> >fails to disclose, fine, they just granted the world a free license to use
> >patent to implement the recommendation.
> And the first time someone tries to claim an "instant free license", watch
> the law suits fly -- nothing is that simple.
Of course, anyone can sue anyone else for anything. But if the patent holder
has signed a contract which obligates them to grant a free patent license to
any implementor of a W3C REC, the implementor will be in a much stronger
position in such a lawsuit than they would be without such a contract in place.
IANAL, so I won't presume to suggest precise wording for such a contract, but I
can't see why it couldn't be written. Granted, that getting Sun, Microsoft, IBM
et al to sign it may be a more difficult problem.
Do You Yahoo!?
NEW from Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.