[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: [Fwd: W3C ridiculous new policy on patents]
Simon St.Laurent wrote: > On Mon, 2001-10-01 at 12:00, David Brownell wrote: > > I think a lot of us were surprised to see this proposal get > > so far along without getting noticed. There's something > > about what W3C did (and plans to do) with respect to > > this proposal which doesn't smell right. > > It doesn't seem likely to smell good to developers distributing their > code for free, certainly. > > I'm not sure if it's: > a) time to leave the US for less patent-friendly places > b) time to ignore W3C work entirely as I won't be able to implement it > > I guess vendor consortia will inevitably serve the interests of vendors. > We might recall the early days of the WWW when the web was in competition with something called "gopher", anyone remember gopher? If not there is a reason: When the WWW was just starting, gopher was significantly more popular and then the University of Michigan asserted its intellectual property rights on gopher indicating that it was to retain the future right to license its use (or something to that effect). Blink. Gopher died, and largely forgotten. At the same time lynx and mosaic were being freely distributed, and these days Sun is having a really hard time giving Solaris away for free. Until now, the WWW has managed to do an excellent job at walking the fine line between open source freeware and vendor interests. The new Semantic Web activities and the RDF WG are conduction their business entirely out in the open in a most refreshing fashion. Yet this new direction is disturbing and in the long run will not help vendors nor users of the internet and www. Imagine the TCP/IP or HTTP protocolsl were patent encumbered, we would be using _something else_ because there is always something else. If the W3C wants to succeed it must take a strong stance on the recommendations it publishes, much as the IETF has done -- witness S/MIME, arguably it has taken longer to get an acceptable security protocol established but that is a short term issue, it is the long term that is what we need to look at. Tim, I am cc:ing you personally because I know your heart is in the right direction on this issue, and I would like to urge you to put your foot down and take a strong stance on this issue. The strength of the W3C recommendation lies in its usefullness as a guide to implementation. I predict that if following such recommendations _might_ expose people to future legal action, then people will simply go elsewhere, just as people went elsewhere when a mere perception of risk became attached to gopher. Learn from your own success. Jonathan
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|