IP: Patents and the W3C

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

> X-Mailer: UserLand Frontier 7.0b26 (Windows NT)
> Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2001 17:44:53 GMT
> From: dave () scripting com (DaveNet email)
> Subject: Patents and the W3C
>
> DaveNet essay, "Patents and the W3C", released on 9/30/2001; 10:41:48 AM 
> Pacific.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ***Patents and free Internet standards
>
> The World Wide Web Consortium, W3C [1], is the keeper of many important 
> Web standards including HTML, XML and HTTP.
>
> The W3C is a consortium [2] of companies of all sizes. My company, 
> UserLand Software, is a member. We agree on a common philosophy -- a level 
> playing field, interoperation between software, and choice for users and 
> developers. That's the foundation that the Web was built on, it's what 
> kept the Web ticking through the dotcom lunacy.
>
> Now several large companies, led by Microsoft, Philips, Apple and 
> Hewlett-Packard, are trying to become the platform vendor that the 
> Internet never had, and imho that's totally counter to the charter for the 
> Internet, and therefore, the W3C.
>
> We may not have the support of the US government in re freedom for 
> developers, but at least we can shame the abusers, force them back into 
> hiding, lest their customers and partners get wind of their greed.
>
> I'm sorry that I tuned in to this so late -- with the confusion around the 
> WTC disaster, we need more time to investigate and build public opinion, 
> but the deadline for comment on this [3] change [4] is /today. /
>
> ***Software patents
>
> Software patents are bad. Period. Investment in new practice happens 
> without them, and choice is essential for progress in our art.
>
> The economics of software favor small independent developers, patents 
> change that. To develop in the world these companies envision, you'd have 
> to have their legal and financial resources to create and publish 
> software. No more small developers. Not good for anyone but the 
> shareholders of the BigCo's -- and long-term it's not good for them 
> either. Where do you think the BigCo's get their ideas? Heh. We've seen 
> what happens when monopolies take over, utter stagnation. Keep them on 
> their toes, let them constantly worry about competition from left field. 
> The W3C used to help us, now they're talking about switching over to the 
> dark side.
>
> Further, I believe that none of these patents will stand up to a First 
> Amendment test. The line between software and speech is non-existent. The 
> act of writing software is very much like writing a short story, a novel, 
> or a news story. I could add a line of code to this piece (I do all the 
> time) and reading the page on the Web could cause code to execute on our 
> server (it does) and then, where is the line? If I write about something 
> that Microsoft or Apple have a patent on, can I explain the idea with a 
> demo? Technically I could often do that. And if the law stops me, where is 
> the First Amendment of the US Constitution? (In the dumpster.)
>
> In an open letter to Stephen King, I wrote on 7/24/00 [5]: "To put it in 
> analogous terms for writers, imagine if you couldn't write a story because 
> Dean Koontz had already written it. What if the idea were as basic as Boy 
> Meets Girl? That's what's going on in another creative space, software."
>
> ***Bigger picture
>
> There's also a new law pending in Washington called the SSSCA [6], which, 
> if passed, would also shut down the independent software developers, to 
> benefit the entertainment business. I'm sorry that I can't cover this in 
> detail, there aren't enough hours in the day. In the meantime, a general 
> statement follows.
>
> To our government, we're turning the resources of the Internet to watch 
> and report on all aspects of the current crisis. It's a national priority 
> to both improve security /and/ preserve freedom. We have new power to 
> inform, more people who think are turning to weblogs. I support the US and 
> our President because of the threat to our lives and way of life. However, 
> don't use this time of crisis to shut down free industries. We're helping 
> because it makes sense, but these changes do not make sense, and they will 
> not pass without observation by informed citizens.
>
> ***Pointer
>
> The W3C was a source of courage in re software patents, and it appears 
> they're caving in. If you think, as I do [7], that patents have no role in 
> the future of Internet standards, please make your point of view heard. 
> The deadline for comments is today.
>
> Here's a page [8] that explains the proposed change at the W3C.
>
> If you're a W3C member, or know one, please spread the word.
>
> Freedom in software development is the issue, and it's rare that we get a 
> chance to support it so clearly.
>
> It's time to speak up in favor of freedom.
>
> Dave Winer
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/
> [2] http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=consortium
> [3] http://www.w3.org/2001/08/16-PP-FAQ
> [4] http://www.w3.org/TR/patent-policy/
> [5] http://davenet.userland.com/2000/07/24/doYouKnowStepenKing
> [6] http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46655,00.html
> [7] http://www.scripting.com/images/2001/09/30/letterToW3c.gif
> [8] http://www.openphd.net/W3C_Patent_Policy/
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> (c) Copyright 1994-2001, Dave Winer. http://davenet.userland.com/.
> "There's no time like now."



For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/