The policy works for me because it reflects 
reality.  Non-RF if available, RAND if gettable, 
private negotiations otherwise.  The decision 
is made relative to the perceived value of the 
patent to the importance of the specification. 

<cynicalCommentary> 
Actually, that tilt will not be changed by the 
policy.  The idea that the web has been 
driven by open source or individuals is largely 
an illusion of our own making much again like 
those investment bankers working hard with 
the press to make the public assume all the 
risk for investments which were flakey from 
the get-go while they made unreasonable profits.

The patents are there.   The W3C imprimatur 
is only as strong as the interests of the 
dues-paying members of the W3C want it to 
be.  When it quits serving their interests, 
it will vanish like the dot.com portfolios.

This situation will get steadily worse. 
Why?  Right now, the webHeads are still 
naively believing there is only One Evil 
Empire to be defeated and can't see how 
that overfocus blinds them to the ever 
present dangers of buy outs, mergers, 
and other means of controlling public and 
private assets.

If the AOL acquisition of Red Hat goes through,
it will be interesting to see how 
long Red Hat sustains an interest in open 
source software once AOL decides that 
owning a suite of integrated applications 
is a better solution to getting market 
share over yetAnotherFrivolous lawsuit.
We replace our machines every two years. 
Again, it won't be as hard to replace one 
king of the hill with another if the 
dirt underneath their feet can be made 
to cascade into a landslide.
 
Was it better to go public to get rich, or 
build up market share then sell the company? 
Both ways worked until the public got wise 
and quit buying.</cynicalCommentary> 

If you want that freedom to innovate, you 
have to design it into the specs and 
standards, not depend on an authority 
bound to the very companies whose existence 
depend on taking and holding market share. 
Pay attention to what Steve Newcomb is saying. 
Even if you don't like his technical solution, 
his point is right on, but even then, balancing 
private control with public interests is a never-ending 
struggle.

len

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Champion [mailto:mc@[...].org]

The RAND policy would "tilt the playing field" in favor of the large 
companies with deep pockets and extensive portfolios of patents to 
cross license, thus stifling the innovation by small companies and 
even individuals that has so famously driven the evolution of the 
Web...

-----------------------------------------------------------------
The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org> , an
initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> 

The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/

To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>