[dsdl-discuss] Re: Papers for Philadelphia meeting

Martin Bryan wrote:

>Rick
>
>I've copied this message to Jim Mason because I don't think the patent issue
>is something WG1 should handle: patentability of SC34 work is really
>something that needs to be discussed in the Saturday morning plenary.
>
Thanks Martin. I hope I don't sound cranky on the issue, but it would be
shame for our standards
to be weakened by private hands grabbing obvious-but-unspoken uses. I
wonder if this means
that the "rationale" text for DSDL parts need to be couched in the
broadest terms possible, to limit
the opportunities for IPR-squatting.

Cheers
Rick Jelliffe

>That's why ISO encourages CD text to be submitted with a NWI proposal.
>
"NWI"?

>It should not be possible to patent an application of a standard, though I
>can see cases for the application of a particular schema if that is required
>to make a new invention operate.
>
>
Does that mean, for example, that it should not be possible to patent a DTD?
What about a schema?

>I doubt if JTC1, who would have to do this, would be willing to take it on,
>but we can but ask.
>
>
Of course, I doubt it too. But I think there may be some use in at least
letting them
know this is an issue of concern. Otherwise, as I said, it makes a
mockery of what
we are doing.

Cheers
Rick Jelliffe

--
DSDL members discussion list
To unsubscribe, please send a message with the
command  "unsubscribe" to dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org
(mailto:dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org?Subject=unsubscribe)