[Patents] W3C: Public review of Patent Policy Framework Last Call

[scott_k_peterson@hp.com (PETERSON,SCOTT K (HP-USA,ex1))]

> The important point is whether it is a good move or a bad move, not
> what other organizations are doing. It is legitimate that we defend
> what is fair in our opinion.

Absolutely, the draft W3C policy should be judged on its own merits.

For those who might be unfamiliar with patent policies of various standards
organizations, I thought it useful both to point out that RAND licensing is
a feature that is common in standards policies and, conversely, to point out
that the RF feature of the draft W3C policy is more out of the ordinary. 

That a particular path has been chosen before is not itself of great help in
judging the appropriateness of taking that path in some other situation --
the different context may make the choice less appropriate, or, indeed, the
prior choice may have been a poor one.

The primary value that I see in noting the prior use of RAND-based policies
is that it may be helpful to look to what the experience has been where that
choice has been made. I believe that there are significant context
differences that must be considered, so I am skeptical about simple
extrapolation from that past experience. However, I think that one's
analysis could be more complete by considering this history.

RAND licensing is a compromise. Whether it strikes a fair balance between
the interests of intellectual property owners and the interests of standards
users will certainly depend both on the particular situation and on the
criteria by which the individual making the judgment defines fairness.

As to the RF feature of the draft W3C policy, in pointing out that that this
takes the W3C on a less tested course is not intended to suggest that the
choice is a poor one. To the contrary, I believe that this feature holds
promise. I contrast it with RAND from a historical perspective because its
greater novelty suggests one might approach its analysis differently - for
example, one might need to look a bit more far afield to find useful
historical comparisons.
___________________________________________________________
Scott K. Peterson               |  Hewlett-Packard Company
Corporate Counsel               |  1 Main St., 10th floor
email: scott_k_peterson@hp.com  |  Cambridge, MA 02142
phone: 617 or telnet 679-9346   |
cell:  978-764-8615             |
fax:   617-679-9330             |