RE: [xml-dev] Re: W3C ridiculous new policy on patents

["Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amy Lewis [mailto:amyzing@talsever.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 7:27 PM
> To: Bullard, Claude L (Len)
> Cc: David Brownell; Jeff Lowery; xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Subject: Re: [xml-dev] Re: W3C ridiculous new policy on patents
> 
> A number of "hot" open source projects
> have been shut down due to enforcement of patents ... 
> sometimes patents that are defensible, but more often, 
> since most software patents are indefensible on their faces, not.

I think this is the real core of the issue, and why many people are outraged
at the W3C: The vendors pushing for a more clear (and potentially favorable)
W3C patent policy talk about their hard-won intellectual property that must
be protected. The people venting at the W3C tend to think of most software
patents as nothing but "new screw thread pitches" as someone put it the
other day ... minor variations on well-known practice that would not be
patentable if the USPTO employed examiners with software development
experience.

Perhaps the way forward is to acknowledge that there may be SOME new
software inventions that are so novel and useful that they deserve a place
in a limited number of W3C Recommendations, even if that entails developers
licensing patents under RAND terms... but that there are certainly MANY
patents that are at best defensive, at worst fraudulent, and the W3C should
lend its resources and credibility to challenging them.