You can not select more than 25 topics
Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.
757 lines
30 KiB
757 lines
30 KiB
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
|
|
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
|
|
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
|
|
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en-US"
|
|
xml:lang="en-US">
|
|
<head>
|
|
<meta name="generator"
|
|
content="HTML Tidy for Mac OS, see www.w3.org" />
|
|
<meta content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"
|
|
http-equiv="Content-Type" />
|
|
<title>Patent Policy Working Group Royalty-Free Patent Policy</title>
|
|
<style type="text/css">
|
|
<!--
|
|
.toc { list-style: none outside; }
|
|
-->
|
|
</style>
|
|
|
|
<link href="http://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/W3C-WD" rel="stylesheet"
|
|
type="text/css" />
|
|
<link />
|
|
</head>
|
|
<body>
|
|
<div class="head"><a href="http://www.w3.org/"><img alt="W3C"
|
|
height="48" width="72" src="http://www.w3.org/Icons/w3c_home" /></a>
|
|
|
|
<h1><a id="title">Patent Policy Working Group<br />
|
|
Royalty-Free Patent Policy</a></h1>
|
|
|
|
<h2><a id="subtitle">W3C Working Draft 26 February 2002</a></h2>
|
|
|
|
<dl>
|
|
<dt>This Version</dt>
|
|
|
|
<dd><a
|
|
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-patent-policy-20020226">http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-patent-policy-20020226</a></dd>
|
|
|
|
<dt>Latest version</dt>
|
|
|
|
<dd><a
|
|
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/patent-policy/">http://www.w3.org/TR/patent-policy/</a></dd>
|
|
|
|
<dt>Previous version:</dt>
|
|
|
|
<dd><a
|
|
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-patent-policy-20010816/">http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-patent-policy-20010816/</a></dd>
|
|
|
|
<dt>Editor:</dt>
|
|
|
|
<dd>Daniel Weitzner, W3C/MIT, <a
|
|
href="mailto:djweitzner@w3.org">djweitzner@w3.org</a></dd>
|
|
</dl>
|
|
|
|
<p class="copyright"><a
|
|
href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/ipr-notice-20000612#Copyright">
|
|
Copyright</a> © 2000-2002 <a href="http://www.w3.org/"><abbr
|
|
title="World Wide Web Consortium">W3C</abbr></a><sup>®</sup> (<a
|
|
href="http://www.lcs.mit.edu/"><abbr
|
|
title="Massachusetts Institute of Technology">MIT</abbr></a>, <a
|
|
href="http://www.inria.fr/"><abbr xml:lang="fr" lang="fr"
|
|
title="Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et Automatique">INRIA</abbr></a>,
|
|
<a href="http://www.keio.ac.jp/">Keio</a>), All Rights Reserved. W3C <a
|
|
href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/ipr-notice-20000612#Legal_Disclaimer">
|
|
liability</a>, <a
|
|
href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/ipr-notice-20000612#W3C_Trademarks">
|
|
trademark</a>, <a
|
|
href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/copyright-documents-19990405">document
|
|
use</a> and <a
|
|
href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/copyright-software-19980720">software
|
|
licensing</a> rules apply.</p>
|
|
|
|
<hr title="Separator for header" />
|
|
</div>
|
|
|
|
<h2><a id="Abstract" name="Abstract">Abstract</a></h2>
|
|
|
|
<p>This is the draft Royalty-Free patent policy for W3C.</p>
|
|
|
|
<h2><a id="Status" name="Status">Status of This Document</a></h2>
|
|
|
|
<p>This draft Royalty-Free patent policy addresses a large number of
|
|
issues raised by comments from W3C Members and the general public.
|
|
However, there are several significant issues still to be decided by
|
|
the Working Group. As such, this draft is still a work in progress. See
|
|
the <a href="#Change">Change Log</a> for a detailed summary of the
|
|
unresolved issues and an overview of the changes between this document
|
|
and previous versions.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>As a public W3C Working Draft, this document may be updated,
|
|
replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is
|
|
inappropriate to use W3C Working Drafts as reference material or to
|
|
cite them as other than "work in progress". A list of all <a
|
|
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/">W3C technical reports</a> can be found at
|
|
http://www.w3.org/TR/.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>Before the patent policy is finalized, at least one more public
|
|
draft will be released for Last Call review. Following W3C Process for
|
|
approving technical Recommendations, after that Last Call, we will
|
|
prepare a final draft (Proposed Recommendation) for W3C Advisory
|
|
Committee review, after which the Director will determine the final
|
|
disposition of the policy.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>Public comments on this draft will be instrumental in the Patent
|
|
Policy Working Group's deliberations. Please send comments to either
|
|
the public comment list <<a
|
|
href="mailto:www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org">www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org</a>>
|
|
or the W3C Member-only list <<a
|
|
href="mailto:w3c-patentpolicy-review@w3.org">w3c-patentpolicy-review@w3.org</a>>.
|
|
Both the <a
|
|
href="http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-patentpolicy-comment/">public</a>
|
|
and the <a
|
|
href="http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-patentpolicy-review/">Member</a>
|
|
(<a href="http://cgi.w3.org/MemberAccess/AccessRequest">Member-only</a>
|
|
link) lists are archived.</p>
|
|
|
|
<h2><a id="toc" name="toc">Table of Contents</a></h2>
|
|
|
|
<ul class="toc">
|
|
<li class="tocline2"><a href="#Abstract">Abstract</a></li>
|
|
|
|
<li class="tocline2"><a href="#Status">Status of This Document</a></li>
|
|
|
|
<li class="tocline2"><a href="#sec-Overview">0. Overview</a></li>
|
|
|
|
<li class="tocline2"><a href="#sec-Licensing">1. Licensing Goals for
|
|
W3C Recommendations</a></li>
|
|
|
|
<li class="tocline2"><a href="#sec-Obligations">2. Licensing
|
|
Obligations of Working Group Participants</a></li>
|
|
|
|
<li class="tocline2"><a href="#sec-Requirements">3. Royalty-Free
|
|
Licensing Requirements</a></li>
|
|
|
|
<li class="tocline2"><a href="#sec-Disclosure">4. Disclosure</a></li>
|
|
|
|
<li class="tocline2"><a href="#sec-Exception">5. Exception
|
|
Handling</a></li>
|
|
|
|
<li class="tocline2"><a href="#sec-appendixes">Appendixes</a></li>
|
|
|
|
<li><a href="#Change">Change Log and Unresolved Issues Summary</a></li>
|
|
|
|
<li class="tocline2"><a href="#sec-references">References</a></li>
|
|
|
|
<li class="tocline2"><a
|
|
href="#sec-acknowledgements">Acknowledgements</a></li>
|
|
</ul>
|
|
|
|
<hr />
|
|
<h2><a id="sec-Overview" name="sec-Overview">0. Overview</a></h2>
|
|
|
|
<p>This patent policy describes:</p>
|
|
|
|
<ol>
|
|
<li>licensing goals for W3C Recommendations</li>
|
|
|
|
<li>licensing obligations that Working Group participants will
|
|
undertake as a condition of Working Group membership, along with means
|
|
of excluding specific patents from those obligations</li>
|
|
|
|
<li>the definition of a Royalty-Free license</li>
|
|
|
|
<li>disclosure rules for W3C Members</li>
|
|
|
|
<li>an exception handling process for situations in which the
|
|
Royalty-Free status of a specification comes under question</li>
|
|
</ol>
|
|
|
|
<h2><a id="sec-Licensing" name="sec-Licensing">1. Licensing Goals for
|
|
W3C Recommendations</a></h2>
|
|
|
|
<p>In order to promote the widest adoption of Web standards, W3C seeks
|
|
to issue Recommendations that can be implemented on a <a
|
|
href="#def-RF">Royalty-Free</a> (RF) basis. Under this policy, W3C will
|
|
not approve a Recommendation if it is aware that <a
|
|
href="#def-essential">Essential Claims</a> exist which are not
|
|
available on Royalty-Free terms.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>To this end, RF Working Group charters will include as a requirement
|
|
that the specification produced by the Working Group will be
|
|
implementable on an RF basis, to the best ability of the Working Group
|
|
and the Consortium.</p>
|
|
|
|
<h2><a id="sec-Obligations" name="sec-Obligations">2. Licensing
|
|
Obligations of Working Group Participants</a></h2>
|
|
|
|
<p>The following obligations apply to all participants in W3C Working
|
|
Groups. These obligations will be stated in each Working Group charter
|
|
and in standard language that will appear in all calls for
|
|
participation (appendixes 1 and 2, to do).</p>
|
|
|
|
<h3><a id="sec-RF-commit" name="sec-RF-commit">2.1. RF Commitment for
|
|
all Working Group Participants</a></h3>
|
|
|
|
<p>As a condition of participating in a Working Group, each W3C Member
|
|
and invited expert agrees to make any <a
|
|
href="#def-essential">Essential Claims</a> it controls available on <a
|
|
href="#def-RF">RF terms</a>, as defined in this policy. With the
|
|
exception of the provisions of section 2.2 below, this licensing
|
|
commitment is binding on participants for the life of the patents in
|
|
question, regardless of changes in participation status or W3C
|
|
Membership.</p>
|
|
|
|
<h3><a id="sec-exclusion" name="sec-exclusion">2.2 Exclusion from RF
|
|
Commitment</a></h3>
|
|
|
|
<p>Under the following conditions, Working Group participants may
|
|
exclude specific patents from the overall RF licensing commitment:</p>
|
|
|
|
<h4><a id="sec-exclusion-with" name="sec-exclusion-with">2.2.1.
|
|
Exclusion with continued participation</a></h4>
|
|
|
|
<p>Specific patents may be excluded from the RF licensing commitment by
|
|
a participant who seeks to remain in the Working Group only if that
|
|
participant discloses specific patents that will not be licensed on RF
|
|
terms within 60 days after the publication of the Working Group's
|
|
requirements document. A participant who excludes patents may continue
|
|
to participate in the Working Group.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>If any claims are made essential by the final Recommendation as a
|
|
result of subject matter not present or apparent in the requirements
|
|
document, the participant may exclude these new Essential Claims, but
|
|
only these claims, by using this exclusion procedure within 60 days
|
|
after the publication of the Last Call Working Draft. After this point,
|
|
no claims may be excluded. (Note that if material new subject matter is
|
|
added after Last Call, then a new Last Call draft will have to be
|
|
produced, thereby allowing another exclusion period for 60 days after
|
|
that most recent Last Call draft.)</p>
|
|
|
|
<h4><a id="sec-exclusion-resign" name="sec-exclusion-resign">2.2.2.
|
|
Exclusion and resignation from the Working Group</a></h4>
|
|
|
|
<p>A participant may resign from the Working Group within 60 days after
|
|
the publication of the requirements document and be excused from all
|
|
licensing commitments.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>If a participant leaves the Working Group later than 60 days after
|
|
the publication of the requirements document, that participant is only
|
|
bound to license claims that are essential based on subject matter
|
|
contained either in the requirements document or the latest Working
|
|
Draft published before the participant resigned from the Working Group.
|
|
Departing participants have 60 days after their actual resignation from
|
|
the Working Group to make such exclusions.</p>
|
|
|
|
<h4><a id="sec-join" name="sec-join">2.2.3. Joining an already
|
|
established Working Group</a></h4>
|
|
|
|
<p>Exclusion for participants who join a Working Group more than 60
|
|
days after the publication of the requirements document must exclude
|
|
Essential Claims covered in the requirements document immediately upon
|
|
joining the Working<a href="#def-RF"></a> Group.</p>
|
|
|
|
<h2><a id="sec-Requirements" name="sec-Requirements">3. Royalty-Free
|
|
Licensing Requirements</a></h2>
|
|
|
|
<p>A <a name="def-RF" id="def-RF">Royalty-Free</a> license shall mean a
|
|
non-assignable, non-sublicensable license to make, have made, use, have
|
|
used, sell, have sold, offer to sell, import, and distribute and
|
|
dispose of implementations of the Recommendation that:</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>1. shall be available to all implementers of the specification
|
|
worldwide, whether or not they are W3C Members;</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>2. shall extend to all <a href="#def-essential">Essential Claims</a>
|
|
owned or controlled by the licensor and its Affiliates;</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>3. may be limited to implementations of the Recommendation, and to
|
|
what is required by the Recommendation;</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>4. may be conditioned on a grant of a reciprocal RF license (as
|
|
defined in this policy) to all <a
|
|
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-patent-policy-20010816/#def-essential">
|
|
Essential Claims</a> owned or controlled by the licensee. A reciprocal
|
|
license may be required to be available to all, and a reciprocal
|
|
license may itself be conditioned on a further reciprocal license from
|
|
all.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>5. may not be conditioned on payment of royalties, fees or other
|
|
consideration;</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>6. may be suspended with respect to any licensee when licensor is
|
|
sued by licensee for infringement of patents used to implement any W3C
|
|
Recommendation;</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>7. may not impose any further conditions or restrictions on the use
|
|
of any technology, intellectual property rights, or other restrictions
|
|
on behavior of the licensee, but may include reasonable, customary
|
|
terms relating to operation or maintenance of the license relationship
|
|
such as the following: choice of law and dispute resolution;</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>8. shall not be considered accepted by an implementer who manifests
|
|
an intent <strong>not</strong> to accept the terms of the Royalty-Free
|
|
license as offered by the licensor.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>License term:</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>9. The RF license shall be made available by the licensor as long as
|
|
the Recommendation is in effect.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>10. If the Recommendation is rescinded by W3C, then no new licenses
|
|
need be granted but any licenses granted before the Recommendation was
|
|
rescinded shall remain in effect.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>11. An interim license shall be made available 60 days after the
|
|
publication of the requirements document. This interim license will
|
|
expire 60 days after the publication of the Proposed Recommendation, or
|
|
90 days after the expiration date of the Working Group charter,
|
|
whichever comes first.</p>
|
|
|
|
<h2><a id="sec-Disclosure" name="sec-Disclosure">4. Disclosure</a></h2>
|
|
|
|
<p>Disclosure is required when an Advisory Committee representative (AC
|
|
rep), or any other party in a Member organization who received the
|
|
disclosure request, has actual knowledge of likely essential claims
|
|
with respect to a specification. Anyone in a Member organization who
|
|
has such knowledge must inform that AC rep. Where disclosure is
|
|
required, the AC rep will do so.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p><strong>Exemption for those making a Royalty-Free licensing
|
|
commitment</strong>: Any W3C Member (whether participating in the
|
|
Working Group or not) who makes a commitment to license any essential
|
|
claims to the Recommendation on a Royalty-Free basis, need not make any
|
|
disclosure for that Recommendation.</p>
|
|
|
|
<h3><a id="sec-disclosure-requests" name="sec-disclosure-requests">4.1.
|
|
Disclosure Requests</a></h3>
|
|
|
|
<p>Disclosure requests, seeking information described in 4.0, will be
|
|
included in the "Status of This Document" section of each technical
|
|
report as it reaches each new maturity level (requirements document,
|
|
Working Draft, Last Call Working Draft, Candidate Recommendation,
|
|
Proposed Recommendation, Recommendation).</p>
|
|
|
|
<h3><a id="sec-disclosure-contents" name="sec-disclosure-contents">4.2.
|
|
Disclosure contents</a></h3>
|
|
|
|
<p>Disclosure statements must include</p>
|
|
|
|
<ol>
|
|
<li>patent number or patent application identification, but need not
|
|
mention claims</li>
|
|
|
|
<li>the Working Group and/or Recommendation to which it applies</li>
|
|
</ol>
|
|
|
|
<p>The disclosure statements should be sent to
|
|
<patent-issues@w3.org>.</p>
|
|
|
|
<h3><a id="sec-good-faith11" name="sec-good-faith11">4.3. Good Faith
|
|
Disclosure Standards</a></h3>
|
|
|
|
<p>Satisfaction of the disclosure requirement does not require a patent
|
|
search, or any additional analysis of the relationship between the
|
|
patents that the Member organization holds and the specification in
|
|
question.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>Disclosure of third-party patents is only required where the
|
|
Advisory Committee representative or Working Group participant has been
|
|
made aware that the third party patent holder has asserted that its
|
|
patent contains claims which would necessarily be infringed in order to
|
|
implement the W3C Recommendation, unless such disclosure would breach
|
|
non-disclosure obligations.</p>
|
|
|
|
<h3><a id="sec-disclosure-timing11" name="sec-disclosure-timing11">4.4.
|
|
Timing of Disclosure Obligations</a></h3>
|
|
|
|
<p>The disclosure obligation is an ongoing obligation that begins with
|
|
the call for participation. Complete disclosure may not be possible
|
|
until later in the process, when the design is more complete, however,
|
|
so Members are only expected to disclose what is known based on the
|
|
current state of the specification. Disclosure as soon as practically
|
|
possible is required.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>The disclosure obligation terminates when the Recommendation is
|
|
published, or when the Working Group terminates.</p>
|
|
|
|
<h3><a id="sec-published11" name="sec-published11">4.5. Disclosure of
|
|
Laid-Open or Published Applications</a></h3>
|
|
|
|
<p>In the case of laid-open or published applications, the Member's
|
|
good faith disclosure obligation extends to unpublished amended and/or
|
|
added claims that have been granted by relevant legal authorities and
|
|
that the Member believes may contain Essential Claims. To satisfy the
|
|
disclosure obligation for such claims, the Member shall either:</p>
|
|
|
|
<ol>
|
|
<li>disclose such claims, or</li>
|
|
|
|
<li>identify those portions of the W3C specification likely to be
|
|
covered by such claims.</li>
|
|
</ol>
|
|
|
|
<h3>4.6. <a id="sec-disclosure-invite11"
|
|
name="sec-disclosure-invite11">Disclosure</a> Obligations of Invited
|
|
Experts</h3>
|
|
|
|
<p>Invited experts participating in a Working Group must comply with
|
|
disclosure obligations to the extent of their own personal
|
|
knowledge.</p>
|
|
|
|
<h3><a id="sec-disclosure-public11" name="sec-disclosure-public11">4.7.
|
|
Disclosures to Be Publicly Available on Recommendation Track</a></h3>
|
|
|
|
<p>Patent disclosure information for each specification on the
|
|
Recommendation track will be made public along with each public Working
|
|
Draft issued by the Working Group. A complete report on patent
|
|
disclosures made with respect to a given specification must be
|
|
available to the public as soon as a Candidate Recommendation is
|
|
published. If the specification moves directly to Proposed
|
|
Recommendation after Last Call Working Draft, then the disclosures are
|
|
made public along with the Proposed Recommendation.</p>
|
|
|
|
<h2><a id="sec-Exception" name="sec-Exception">5. Exception
|
|
Handling</a></h2>
|
|
|
|
<p>In the event a patent has been disclosed that may be essential, but
|
|
is not available on RF terms, then a Patent Advisory Group (PAG) will
|
|
be launched to resolve the conflict. The PAG is an ad-hoc group
|
|
constituted specifically in relation to the Working Group with the
|
|
conflict, and will meet in order to help the Consortium find a
|
|
resolution to the identified problem and then dissolve. During the time
|
|
that the PAG is operating, the Working Group may continue its technical
|
|
work within the bounds of its charter.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>A PAG may also be convened in the event Essential Claims are
|
|
discovered after a Recommendation is issued. A PAG convened in this
|
|
manner may advise the Consortium to rescind the Recommendation. Such
|
|
advice will be forwarded for Advisory Committee review and Director's
|
|
decision. In this case the PAG will be open to any interested Member,
|
|
though the PAG may choose to meet without the holder of the Essential
|
|
Claims in question.</p>
|
|
|
|
<h3><a id="sec-PAG-composition" name="sec-PAG-composition">5.1. PAG
|
|
Composition</a></h3>
|
|
|
|
<p>The PAG is composed of:</p>
|
|
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li>The Advisory Committee representatives of each W3C Member
|
|
organization participating in the Working Group (or alternate
|
|
designated by the AC rep)</li>
|
|
|
|
<li>Working Group Team Contact</li>
|
|
|
|
<li>W3C Counsel</li>
|
|
|
|
<li>Working Group Chair, <em>ex officio</em></li>
|
|
|
|
<li>Domain Leader responsible for the Working Group</li>
|
|
|
|
<li>Other W3C Team members as needed</li>
|
|
</ul>
|
|
|
|
<p>W3C Member participants in the PAG should be authorized to represent
|
|
their organization's views on patent licensing issues. Any participant
|
|
in the PAG may also be represented by legal counsel, though this is not
|
|
required. Invited experts are not entitled to participate in the PAG,
|
|
though the PAG may chose to invite any qualified experts who would be
|
|
able to assist the PAG in its determinations.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>W3C expects to provide permanent legal staffing to all PAGs in the
|
|
form of a Team member who develops experience with the PAG process and
|
|
patent issues at W3C.</p>
|
|
|
|
<h3><a id="sec-PAG-procedures111" name="sec-PAG-procedures111">5.2 PAG
|
|
Procedures</a></h3>
|
|
|
|
<p>The PAG will be convened by the Working Group Team contact, based on
|
|
a charter developed initially by the Team. The charter should
|
|
include:</p>
|
|
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li>clear goals for the PAG, especially a statement of the question(s)
|
|
the PAG is to answer;</li>
|
|
|
|
<li>duration (maximum 90 days);</li>
|
|
|
|
<li>confidentiality status, which must follow the underlying Working
|
|
Group (Member only, public, etc.).</li>
|
|
</ul>
|
|
|
|
<p>The PAG may seek an extension of time from the Director, but must
|
|
state a reason for extension and report on progress to date.The PAG,
|
|
once convened, may propose changes to its charter as appropriate, to be
|
|
accepted based on consensus of the PAG participants. The Team will
|
|
choose a member of the PAG to serve as Chair.</p>
|
|
|
|
<h3><a id="sec-PAG-conclusion" name="sec-PAG-conclusion">5.3. PAG
|
|
Conclusion</a></h3>
|
|
|
|
<p>After appropriate consultation, the PAG may conclude:</p>
|
|
|
|
<ol>
|
|
<li>The initial concern has been resolved, enabling the Working Group
|
|
to continue.</li>
|
|
|
|
<li>The Working Group should be instructed to consider designing around
|
|
the identified claims.</li>
|
|
|
|
<li>The Team should seek further information and evaluation, including
|
|
but not limited to evaluation of the patents in question or the terms
|
|
under which acceptable licensing may be available.</li>
|
|
|
|
<li>The specification under development should be produced on RAND
|
|
(reasonable and non-discriminatory) terms, either at W3C or some other
|
|
body. Note that there is not yet any process for developing or issuing
|
|
RAND specifications. Therefore if a PAG makes a recommendation to
|
|
proceed on RAND terms, Advisory Committee review and Director's
|
|
decision will be required. It is also possible that a PAG could
|
|
recommend that the work be taken to another organization.</li>
|
|
|
|
<li>The Working Group should be terminated.</li>
|
|
|
|
<li>The Recommendation (assuming it has already been issued) should be
|
|
rescinded.</li>
|
|
</ol>
|
|
|
|
<p>In any case, the PAG must state its reasons in a W3C document to
|
|
become public with the next public draft of the specification.</p>
|
|
|
|
<h2><a id="sec-appendixes" name="sec-appendixes">Appendix 1 - Standard
|
|
patent language for calls for participation</a></h2>
|
|
|
|
<p>To do.</p>
|
|
|
|
<h2><a id="sec-appendix-2" name="sec-appendix-2">Appendix 2 - Standard
|
|
patent language for Working Group Charters</a></h2>
|
|
|
|
<p>To do.</p>
|
|
|
|
<h2><a id="sec-appendix-3" name="sec-appendix-3">Appendix 3 - Standard
|
|
patent language for W3C Recommendations</a></h2>
|
|
|
|
<p>To do.</p>
|
|
|
|
<h2><a id="sec-appendix-4" name="sec-appendix-4">Appendix 4 - Model
|
|
charter for Patent Advisory Group</a></h2>
|
|
|
|
<p>To do.</p>
|
|
|
|
<h2><a name="def-essential" id="def-essential">Appendix 5 - Definition
|
|
of Essential Claims</a></h2>
|
|
|
|
<p>"Essential Claims" shall mean all claims in any patent or patent
|
|
application with an effective filing date within one year and one day
|
|
after the publication of the first public Working Draft, in any
|
|
jurisdiction in the world, that a Member (or a licensor or licensee,
|
|
with reference to entities other than Members) owns, or under which a
|
|
Member (or a licensor or licensee) has the right to grant licenses
|
|
without obligation of payment or other consideration to an unrelated
|
|
third party, that would necessarily be infringed by implementation of
|
|
the Recommendation. A claim is necessarily infringed hereunder only
|
|
when it is not possible to avoid infringing it because there is no
|
|
non-infringing alternative for implementing the required portions of
|
|
the Recommendation. Existence of a non-infringing alternative shall be
|
|
judged based on the state-of-the-art at the time the specification
|
|
becomes a Recommendation.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>The following are expressly excluded from and shall not be deemed to
|
|
constitute Essential Claims:</p>
|
|
|
|
<ol class="definitions">
|
|
<li>any claims other than as set forth above even if contained in the
|
|
same patent as Essential Claims; and</li>
|
|
|
|
<li>claims which would be infringed only by:
|
|
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li>portions of an implementation that are not required by the
|
|
Recommendation, or</li>
|
|
|
|
<li>enabling technologies that may be necessary to make or use any
|
|
product or portion thereof that complies with the Recommendation but
|
|
are not themselves expressly set forth in the Recommendation (e.g.,
|
|
semiconductor manufacturing technology, compiler technology,
|
|
object-oriented technology, basic operating system technology, and the
|
|
like); or</li>
|
|
|
|
<li>the implementation of technology developed elsewhere and merely
|
|
incorporated by reference in the body of the Recommendation.</li>
|
|
</ul>
|
|
</li>
|
|
|
|
<li>design patents and design registrations.</li>
|
|
</ol>
|
|
|
|
<p>For purposes of this definition, the Recommendation shall be deemed
|
|
to include only architectural and interoperability requirements and
|
|
shall not include any implementation examples or any other material
|
|
that merely illustrates the requirements of the Recommendation.</p>
|
|
|
|
<h2><a name="Change" id="Change">Change Log and Unresolved Issue
|
|
Summary</a></h2>
|
|
|
|
<p><em>The links to Member issues and decisions D4-D18 in the following
|
|
paragraph are W3C <a
|
|
href="http://cgi.w3.org/MemberAccess/AccessRequest">Member-only</a>.</em></p>
|
|
|
|
<p>Member <a
|
|
href="http://www.w3.org/2001/10/PPF-Member-Issues">issues</a>: The
|
|
document is intended to represent decisions on all matters currently
|
|
decided in the <a
|
|
href="http://www.w3.org/2002/02/01-ppwg-decisions.html">Major
|
|
Decisions</a> issues list, current through the 19 February 2002 Patent
|
|
Policy Working Group teleconference. This document leaves (without
|
|
prejudice) the following issues unaddressed:</p>
|
|
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li><a
|
|
href="http://www.w3.org/2002/02/01-ppwg-decisions.html#D4">D4</a>:
|
|
licensing obligations for government participants</li>
|
|
|
|
<li><a
|
|
href="http://www.w3.org/2002/02/01-ppwg-decisions.html#D10">D10</a>:
|
|
coverage of optional features in Essential Claims definition and
|
|
tightening binding to RFC 2119 terms</li>
|
|
|
|
<li><a
|
|
href="http://www.w3.org/2002/02/01-ppwg-decisions.html#D11">D11</a>:
|
|
the results of discussions from the Open Source/Free Software Task
|
|
Force regarding open source licensors and field-of-use limitations in
|
|
the definition of the RF license. <em>Note that depending on how the
|
|
issue is decided, other questions about the license terms may have to
|
|
be re-considered.</em></li>
|
|
|
|
<li><a
|
|
href="http://www.w3.org/2002/02/01-ppwg-decisions.html#D13">D13</a>:
|
|
language for the license grant</li>
|
|
|
|
<li><a
|
|
href="http://www.w3.org/2002/02/01-ppwg-decisions.html#D14">D14</a>:
|
|
the role of RAND licensing terms in the W3C Process</li>
|
|
|
|
<li><a
|
|
href="http://www.w3.org/2002/02/01-ppwg-decisions.html#D15">D15</a>:
|
|
License commitment timing for submitters</li>
|
|
|
|
<li><a
|
|
href="http://www.w3.org/2002/02/01-ppwg-decisions.html#D16">D16</a>:
|
|
disclosure and licensing obligations for invited experts</li>
|
|
|
|
<li><a
|
|
href="http://www.w3.org/2002/02/01-ppwg-decisions.html#D17">D17</a>:
|
|
Disclosure of unpublished applications</li>
|
|
|
|
<li><a
|
|
href="http://www.w3.org/2002/02/01-ppwg-decisions.html#D18">D18</a>:
|
|
Licensing obligation after Recommendation is rescinded<a
|
|
href="http://www.w3.org/2002/02/01-ppwg-decisions.html#D16"></a></li>
|
|
</ul>
|
|
|
|
<p>In response to <a
|
|
href="http://www.w3.org/2001/11/PPF-Public-Issues.html">public
|
|
comments</a>, the following major changes were made:</p>
|
|
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li><a
|
|
href="http://www.w3.org/2001/11/PPF-Public-Issues.html#discrim">P1</a>,
|
|
<a href="http://www.w3.org/2001/11/PPF-Public-Issues.html#rand">P5</a>:
|
|
RAND track dropped</li>
|
|
|
|
<li><a
|
|
href="http://www.w3.org/2001/11/PPF-Public-Issues.html#defeat">P2</a>,
|
|
<a href="http://www.w3.org/2001/11/PPF-Public-Issues.html#phil">P4</a>:
|
|
Strong preference for RF Recommendations</li>
|
|
|
|
<li><a
|
|
href="http://www.w3.org/2001/11/PPF-Public-Issues.html#discrim">P1</a>:
|
|
The Patent Policy Working Group believes that the RF license as
|
|
proposed is compatible with all major Open Source licenses except the
|
|
GPL. We are still working on GPL-related issues.</li>
|
|
</ul>
|
|
|
|
<h3><a id="sec-recent-changes" name="sec-recent-changes">Changes from
|
|
16 August 2002 Last Call draft to 22 February 2002 Public Working
|
|
Draft</a></h3>
|
|
|
|
<p>The following major changes to the policy have been made between the
|
|
<a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-patent-policy-20010816/">16
|
|
August 2001 Last Call draft</a> and the <a
|
|
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-patent-policy-20020226">26 February
|
|
2002 Public Working Draft</a>:</p>
|
|
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li>RAND track removed</li>
|
|
|
|
<li>Membership-wide RAND licensing commitment replaced with RF
|
|
licensing commitment for Working Group participants only</li>
|
|
|
|
<li>Defensive suspension allowed in the case where a holder of
|
|
Essential Claims is sued for patent infringement in the implementation
|
|
of a W3C Recommendation</li>
|
|
|
|
<li>earlier exclusion (opt-out) of patents required.</li>
|
|
|
|
<li>Differential licensing obligations between "Contributors" and
|
|
"non-Contributors" removed.</li>
|
|
|
|
<li>Patent Advisory Groups streamlined:
|
|
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li>charters required with specific questions to answer</li>
|
|
|
|
<li>time limit on operation of each PAG</li>
|
|
</ul>
|
|
</li>
|
|
</ul>
|
|
|
|
<h2><a id="sec-references" name="sec-references">References</a></h2>
|
|
|
|
<dl>
|
|
<dt><a id="ref-PROCESS" name="ref-PROCESS">[PROCESS]</a></dt>
|
|
|
|
<dd><cite><a href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/">World Wide
|
|
Web Consortium Process Document</a></cite>, I. Jacobs, Editor. W3C, 19
|
|
July 2001. The latest version of this document is
|
|
http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process.</dd>
|
|
</dl>
|
|
|
|
<h2><a id="sec-acknowledgements"
|
|
name="sec-acknowledgements">Acknowledgements</a></h2>
|
|
|
|
<p>W3C's evolving patent policy has been informed by help, comments,
|
|
criticism, and occasional rants by W3C Members, many voices from the
|
|
independent developer and Open Source/Free Software communities, W3C
|
|
Advisory Committee representatives, the W3C Team, the W3C Advisory
|
|
Board, and participants in the Patent Policy Working Group. Those who
|
|
have participated in the beta testing of this policy, leading up to the
|
|
<a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/patent-practice">W3C Current Patent
|
|
Practice</a> document, have made invaluable contributions to shaping a
|
|
policy that will actually contribute to achieving W3C's mission.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>Every participant in the Patent Policy Working Group has made
|
|
substantial contributions to this document. Since its inception, the
|
|
following individuals have participated in the group:</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>Jean-François Abramatic (W3C), Chuck Adams (IBM), Martin Ashton
|
|
(Reuters, Ltd.), Carl Cargill (Sun Microsystems), Wanda Cox (Apple
|
|
Computer), W. Mike Deese (Microsoft), Mark DeLuca (Woodcock Washburn
|
|
LLP for Microsoft), Don Deutsch (Oracle), Tom Frost (AT&T), Michael
|
|
Gelblum (Oracle), Mari Georges (ILOG S.A.), Lisa Goldman (Sun
|
|
Microsystems), Toon Groenendaal (Philips Electronics), Michele Herman
|
|
(Microsoft), Richard J. Holleman (IBM), Ian Jacobs (W3C), Glen Johnson
|
|
(Nortel Networks), Jerry Kellenbenz, (Apple Computer), Alan Kotok
|
|
(W3C), Gerry Lane (IBM), Arnaud Le Hors (IBM), Susan Lesch (W3C), Steve
|
|
Nunn (The Open Group), Scott K. Peterson (Hewlett-Packard), Tony E.
|
|
Piotrowski (Philips Electronics), Chuck Powers (Motorola), Barry Rein
|
|
(Pennie & Edmonds for W3C), Gib Ritenour (Nortel Networks), Michael
|
|
Schallop (Sun Microsystems), Kevin Smith (Nortel Networks), George
|
|
Tacticos (IBM), Daniel Weitzner (W3C), George Willingmyre (GTW
|
|
Associates), Helene Plotka Workman (Apple Computer). Invited experts
|
|
are Eben Moglen (Free Software Foundation), Bruce Perens (Software in
|
|
the Public Interest), Larry Rosen (Rosenlaw.com for Open Source
|
|
Initiative).</p>
|
|
</body>
|
|
</html>
|
|
|
|
|