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

More Patent Lunacies

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: More Patent Lunacies
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 12:53:33 -0600

In the midst of this fun, here is an article that illustrates 
how "standard: the concept", gets abused.  In effect, there 
isn't much difference between a proprietary technology and 
a patent-encumbered standard if the terms of use aren't very 
well-defined prior to implementation.  A deal that changes just 
before showtime is a rotten deal and the performer should fire 
their agent.  Apple is standing up to MPEG.  Good for them.

http://news.com.com/2100-1023-835740.html

And good for the W3C members who realized that patents 
per se aren't evil;  a lack of policy for establishing 
terms of use (licensing) up front with full disclosure 
would be.  Otherwise, boot it away.  Open tech is always 
to be preferred, but the opportunities are narrowing. 
The bloody BT patent case on hyperlinks is still brewing. 
Note that even the local papers here in Alabama now know 
who Vannevar Bush and Doug Englebart are although they 
still have a problem figuring out that hyperlinks are 
not a "Web" invention.  It's progress but someone really 
should do a Wall Street Journal article on the history 
of hypermedia with some references to these folks, the 
Dexter Reference model, and so on.  This isn't an XML 
or markup thing, but it keeps biting us on the posterior.

len

• Prev by Date: RE: WSIO vs. Semantic Web
• Next by Date: Re: Errors in Kendall Clark's xml.com article on QNames
• Previous by thread: Modular XHTML
• Next by thread: RE: Web Services Hype and Reality (was RE: WSIO vs. Semantic Web
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread