[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Let's get real on W3C XForms 1.0 (why it stinks, to day)

• From: Winchel 'Todd' Vincent III <winchel@m...>
• To: Ann Navarro <ann@w...>, Don Park <donpark@d...>,xml-dev@l...
• Date: Sat, 06 Oct 2001 16:33:04 -0400

From: "Ann Navarro" <ann@w...>
>
> How long do you think it takes to do a thorough examination of an IP
> portfolio with tens of thousands of items in it, to be able to declare
with
> any kind of competence that there is no conflict that needs to be
declared?
>
> Multiply that by the number of activity proposals in a year, times the
> salaries of the in-house counsel involved.
>
> Which is cheaper -- doing this or making a claim after the fact if one is
> discovered?

This argument amounts to saying that because its cheaper to avoid or ignore
the law, it is acceptable to do so.  Big companies have big overhead.
That's the price of being a big company.  Little companies often do not have
the resources to protect their valuable intellectual property rights.
That's the price of being a little company.

With respect to contributing to a standards process, if one chooses to
participate, I have to agree with Don Park -- it is very black and white --
either disclose your patent or other IP rights or loose them.  If, having
participated in standard development, you later make a valid claim to
ownership, supported by law, and will not license royalty free, then any
credible standards organization ought not to recommend the standard.  This
has been the policy of the IETF and the W3C for some time and is one of the
reasons those two organizations have become credible standards organization.

I suspect, because I'm not an insider, that as the W3C has become more
credible, popular, and well-funded, larger companies have become more
involved and have exerted more influence on policy and process.  I assume
from what I'm reading that the RAND (and the lack of publicity during its
seemingly short comment period) are symptoms of a takeover from within.

The good news is that all of the W3C's recommendations to date have been
licensed royalty free and perpetually, which can't be taken away.  In the
future, if the W3C implements bad policy, then people will simple ignore and
go elsewhere.  There is, after all, power in numbers.

Todd

================================
Winchel "Todd" Vincent III
Attorney and Technical Consultant
Project Director, E-CT-Filing Project
Georgia State University College of Law
US Phone: 404.651.4297
US Cell: 404.822.4668
US Voice Mail: 770.216.1633
US Fax: 770.216.1633
Email: winchel@m...

• References:
  • RE: Let's get real on W3C XForms 1.0 (why it stinks, to day)
    • From: Ann Navarro <ann@w...>
  • RE: Let's get real on W3C XForms 1.0 (why it stinks, to day)
    • From: Ann Navarro <ann@w...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Let's get real on W3C XForms 1.0 (why it stinks, to day)
• Next by Date: Re: Let's get real on W3C XForms 1.0 (why it stinks, to day)
• Previous by thread: RE: Let's get real on W3C XForms 1.0 (why it stinks, to day)
• Next by thread: Re: Let's get real on W3C XForms 1.0 (why it stinks, to day)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread