[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [xml-dev] standards vs. the public
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: Jonathan Borden <email@example.com>,"Steven R. Newcomb" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 08:15:25 -0500
> From: Jonathan Borden [mailto:email@example.com]
>Hah! My question is whether the W3C has anything possible to geld. If so,
>ought stick to its public mission statement.
If it would stick to specifications that can then be met with
multiple implementations some of which might containe licensable
material instead of embarking on standards that become
a law for interoperation, then they can do that. The W3C weakens
itself grabbing for more power than it needs, IMO.
>Look, anyone with real IP worthy of a real patent probably wouldn't waste
>their time sitting in W3C working groups. If you had really invented a
>better mousetrap, why waste one's time trying to specify the mouse?
Some will, some won't. The problem is that they have already
stumbled into patents unknowingly (let's hope). They need a
policy for that. All I think we may be debating is whether
or not when they encounter a patent, they can consider terms
that include royalties. You say no, I say, they need flexibility.
What most of us including me are wary of is that this can be
used by influential companies and individuals to get concessions
that aren't the best deal for all concerned. Well, it looks
to me as it that sort of thing has been going on for awhile and
now at least, it is governed by policy.
>I don't want to see an Internet where people are taxed for speaking, nor do
>I want to see an Internet where we have 1000 dialects and speach is
>incomprehensible. Go make your business case.
Nor I and restictive licenses at the level of the
application languages is not good for anyone, but that
is usually a vertical concern. Almost everyone who tried
it with DTDs except possibly the SAE watched their
language die. RAND non-RF should be the extreme
exception and never be applied against the public
interest. They need a policy that provides a
process for determining that.