SIRs should be filed for many concepts.... (was Re: [xml-dev] Patents, schmatents (was: hi))

["Bob Wyman" <bob@wyman.us>]

Bob Foster wrote:
> Surely you're not proposing to carpet-bomb the
> patent system with n=(applications*interchangeable
> -technologies) SIRs? 
    No. Neither SIRs nor patents should be issued if the 
claims depend on mere substitution of equivalents. I suggest 
that what we need are SIRs that claim broad domains, not 
specific ones. For instance, we're currently in the process 
of working out the Atom syntax for syndication as a 
replacement for RSS. We can now predict with great certainty 
that just as there are claims being submitted and granted 
that depend on HTML, XML, etc. there will soon be claims made 
on specific uses of Atom. So, what we need is a SIR filed on 
the concept of "syndication" that blocks these patents. In 
the SIR, Atom, RSS, ICE, etc. should only be presented as 
examples of how to do the broadly described function that is 
syndication. Syndication itself should be described in great 
detail and every effort should be made to identify 
the "obvious" fact that you can use syndication formats for 
just about anything, that there are endless obvious 
extensions to these formats, etc. The point would be to craft 
the broadest conceivable set of claims and a very detailed 
specification. The SIR should also contain a bibliography 
ensuring that all published, known materials are identified 
to make it easy for anyone to find them in the future. Known 
applications, real or anticipated, should be listed as well.
    Just as we build up specifications by using mailing 
lists, blogs, wikis etc. we should use the same process to 
build up the Atom-Syndication-SIR and similar SIRs in all the 
other domains that we're innovating in. Every W3C project, 
IETF project or GNU effort should either be working on their 
SIR of considering if an existing SIR needs to be 
supplemented... i.e. We would have the inevitable editor or 
group of editors who solicited comments from the net at large 
and produced a document that expressed, to the greatest 
possible extent, what our hopes and expectations are for the 
application domain -- in the most general possible words. 
(Note: I do realize that there might be some difficulty in 
submitting a SIR that had several hundred "inventors." I'm 
sure the lawyers can help work out this problem.) It should 
become a mark of a "responsible" and "open" project that they 
are preparing a SIR for filing or have already done so.
    If we accepted this discipline of writing and filing 
SIRs, we would block a vast number of patents while at the 
same time produce documents that would themselves be quite 
valuable as historical records and as tutorial materials for 
people coming to a new domain...
    It was good fun to see TBL get his knighthood recently. 
Perhaps, the patent system's SIR gives us a way to do the 
same on our own... It would be wonderful if we could start 
valuing the submission of SIRs in broad domains by referring 
to their authors as "Sir"...

	bob wyman