Flutterby™! : Dori Smith on W3C patents

Next unread comment / Catchup all unread comments User Account Info | Logout | XML/Pilot/etc versions | Long version (with comments) | Weblog archives | Site Map | | Browse Topics

Dori Smith on W3C patents

2001-10-04 13:59:29+00 by Dan Lyke 6 comments

Dori Smith on the W3C patent policy. I hear where she's coming from, but what I'd really like are better tools against the evil that is software patents. Although I had occasion to turn style sheets back on recently (to go look at Eric Meyer's css/edge, which is cool), forgot to turn 'em off, and pulled up my daily dose... umm... having that particular patent withdrawn from public use wouldn't be skin off my nose.

[ related topics: Intellectual Property Web development Software Engineering ]

comments in ascending chronological order (reverse):

#Comment made: 2002-02-21 05:32:55+00 by: Dori

what I'd really like are better tools against the evil that is software patents.

Oh, you and me both.

But if you tell someone "You need to give up something you own or leave," it's not that difficult to imagine what their next step is going to be. The rightness of the ownership in the first place isn't something that can be addressed by the W3C; that's a Patent Office disaster, and they're the ones that need to fix it.

#Comment made: 2002-02-21 05:32:55+00 by: Dan Lyke

So how do we go about lobbying for that. I've been assuming that sooner or later this idiocy would become too onerous to continue, but business method and software patents just seem to be getting more and more silly.

Especially when (and I'm deliberately[Wiki] not giving examples here) companies are not disclosing their own prior publications in applications, and when it's acknowledge that if you have enough money to fight it you don't want to because that'll throw your own patents into questions, so you accept it 'cause the status quo keeps out the little guys and the real innovators.

I don't see much on the League for Programming Freedom website other than what they're doing, they don't seem to be asking for resources. Anyone know of other ways to help?

#Comment made: 2001-10-04 18:24:43+00 by: Dan Lyke

#Comment made: 2002-02-21 05:32:55+00 by: TheSHAD0W

Take IP patents, mix in MS's "embrace and extend", and a little of the tactics they're using on Java now, and I think you'll see the future of the net -- a really, really big mess.

I suspect, in the end, it'll all be okay. Technologies that are tied up in IP twine will be shuffled off into plug-ins. Have to pay for a plug in??! The software companies don't care, and the users probably won't pay. People won't see the effects, the technologies won't be included in web pages, and the point will be moot.

If you want to take up arms against IP patents, do like Ogg and invent alternative protocols that do the same neat things as the proprietary stuff. Give the people an alternative.

#Comment made: 2002-02-21 05:32:55+00 by: Dan Lyke

Wes Felter linked to this rant about Apple's compositing patent which shows a perfect example of the problem.

#Comment made: 2002-02-21 05:32:56+00 by: Mars Saxman

Apple patented that technique in 1995? I think *I* have an example of prior art.

Software patents seem designed to encourage stupidity.