![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
This is outrageous as it will stop the development of opensource software.
If the W3C needs money, then they should look from their sponsors. I hope this won't affect IETF, and that Internet Standard won't become closed, open only to the RICH countries and RICH people (talk about digital divide!). If W3C goes in this move, then I suggest that IETF bring back the HTML standards back into the IETF.
- the effort is emphatically NOT an attempt to raise money for W3C.
[Speaking for myself only]
#g --
[...]
Was this discussed by the IETF or via the IETF/W3C liaison committee? I didn't see it in the archive. The review period ends today!
A summary at http://www.openphd.net/W3C_Patent_Policy/ W3C Patent Policy W3C and the Promotion of Fee-based Standards for the Web
last call review period closes on 30 September 2001
Comment archives are at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-patentpolicy-comment/
The Working Draft (http://www.w3.org/TR/patent-policy/) (reproduced in the Patent Policy Frequently Asked Questions, http://www.w3.org/2001/08/16-PP-FAQ) also states that RAND allows for licensing audits (RAND "may include reasonable, customary terms relating to operation or maintenance of the license relationship such as the following: audit (when relevant to fees), choice of law, and dispute resolution.")
Shirley Tseng Infinite Global Infrastructures www.igillc.com stseng at igillc.com
------------ Graham Klyne GK at NineByNine.org
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.