• From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
• To: Jonathan Borden <jborden@m...>
• Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2001 11:32:30 -0400

Jonathan Borden wrote:


> 2) Commercial entities that do not wish to, or are not able, to fully
> disclose their IPR should be prevented access to the relevent WG activities
> and internal discussions if such discussions are not otherwise publically
> available.

AFAIK (and IANAL), the W3C can't hold any IPRs, for it is not a
legal person.  The copyright notices, e.g., are in the names of MIT,
INRIA, and Keio.

-- 
Not to perambulate             || John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
    the corridors               || http://www.reutershealth.com
during the hours of repose     || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
    in the boots of ascension.  \\ Sign in Austrian ski-resort hotel

• References:
  • RE: W3C as Golden Goose (was RE: [Fwd: W3C ridiculous n ewpolicy on patents])
    • From: "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@S...>
  • WWW /= W3C: Has W3C mission changed?
    • From: Jonathan Borden <jborden@m...>

• Prev by Date: RE: WWW /= W3C: Has W3C mission changed?
• Next by Date: Re: WWW /= W3C: Has W3C mission changed?
• Previous by thread: WWW /= W3C: Has W3C mission changed?
• Next by thread: standards vs. the public
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread