Re: W3C Patent Policy

[W3C Postmaster <http://www.w3.org/~postmaster>]

Thank for taking the time to comment on the proposed W3C Patent Policy. 
A response to the issue(s) you raise will be included in the disposition
of comments to be used by the Patent Policy Working Group in preparing a
final proposal.

Thanks again,

Danny Weitzner <http://www.w3.org/~djweitzner>
Patent Policy WG Chair



----------------------------------------------------------------------
Received: from smtp1.san.rr.com (smtp1.san.rr.com [24.25.195.37])
	by tux.w3.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA20285
	for <http://www.w3.org/~www-patentpolicy-comment>; Thu, 11 Jul 2002 16:05:14 -0400
Received: from [192.168.123.158] (24-25-221-192.san.rr.com [24.25.221.192])
	by smtp1.san.rr.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id g6BK5DV11215
	for <http://www.w3.org/~www-patentpolicy-comment>; Thu, 11 Jul 2002 13:05:14 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: http://www.mail18.pair.com/~lesch
Message-Id: <http://www./~p05111b07b953954f9313[192.168.123.158]>
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 13:05:11 -0700
To: http://www.w3.org/~www-patentpolicy-comment
From: http://dummy.us.eu.org/robert (by way of Susan Lesch)
Subject: W3C Patent Policy
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"


Dear W3C Patent Policy Working Group,

I'm concerned about the recent Patent Policy Framework draft, which could
allow W3C members to charge royalty fees for technologies included in web
standards.

In particular, I object to the inclusion of a "reasonable and
non-discriminatory" (RAND) licensing option in the proposed policy. I
believe that the exclusive use of a "royalty-free" (RF) licensing model is
in the best interests of the Internet community, and that RAND licensing
would always necessarily exclude some would-be implementors.

I applaud the W3C for its tradition of providing open-source reference
implementations and its work to promote a wide variety of interoperable
implementations of its open standards. The W3C can best continue its work
of "leading the Web to its full potential" by continuing this tradition,
and saying no to RAND licensing.

Sincerely,

robert

Boston,