Patents and W3C Recommendations
The W3C Patent Policy
Rigo
Wenning
Geneva, Switzerland
3 March 2006
Rigo Wenning (Staff Counsel - W3C) <rigo@w3.org>
W3C: Leading the Web to its Full Potential
Founded by Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee in 1994,
W3C is:
- Providing the Vision to Lead.
- Engineering the Standards that Make the Web
Work.
- by consensus and accountability
International Web Standards Organization
Truly International …
Developing Standards at W3C
Clear and effective Process, which encourages:
- Member-neutrality
- Clear Patent
Policy
- Consistent architectural framework
- Coordination, consensus and
interoperability
- No "rubber stamping"
- Must engineer dependencies (inside and outside of W3C)
From a Web of Documents ...
… towards a Web:
- of Data and Services
- on Everything
- for Everyone
- ... that is Interoperable, Trustworthy, Evolving with time ...
A consistent Architecture
The Re-usable Web (its a feature!)
Early Web Experience
Web "business model" built upon open, free (explicit
or implicit), cool foundation causes rapid expansion
Licensing causes halt
- For example, see Wikipedia entry on rise of
Web vs. contemporaneous decline of Gopher upon announcement
by University of Minnesota that they would charge licensing fees for
Gopher.
As the Web Grew the issues appeared
- Fierce competition to exploit the commercial potential
of the Web
- Increasing number of patents asserted on foundational
Web technologies
- Some holders sought royalties, other arrangements
Increasing level of concern
Confusion, legal actions and delays:
- @ W3C: P3P/Intermind (1999) [1],
[2]; XLink; XPointer; CSS; HTML/Eolas (2003+) [3]
- Perceived risk to the Web business model:
- to the continued development of open Web standards
- to the continued growth of the Web as a medium for
communication
- to the continued growth of the Web as an instrument of
commerce
Consequences felt
- patents create high costs in web-standardization by:
- causing heavy delays
- not working well with the web's business model
- slowing or hindering technology deployment
- killing economic network effects on the web
- creating unpleasant surprises
W3C Patent Policy History
- Patent Policy Working Group chartered in 1999
- Over 50
experts from leading companies, including participation
from Open Source
- Considered range of possibilities in RAND-RF space
- Goal was the best policy to foster
- development of foundational Web standards
- continued growth and success of the Web
New Patent Policy took 4 years
- New Patent
Policy approved in May 2003
- Strong support of the final draft by PPWG, W3C Membership,
interested public
- Ground-breaking Policy, providing a model considered by other
Internet standards orgs
Patent Policy in a Nutshell
- Goal:
- RF Recommendations with minimal interruption
to technical work
- Method:
- W3C RF licensing definition
- RF pledge to the public on joining Working Group
- Disclosure rules
- Exclusion
- Exception Handling
Royalty-Free Licensing Commitment
- In
order to participate in a Working Group, a participant must agree to
license Essential
Claims they hold on an RF basis
- "Essential Claims" shall mean all claims in any patent or patent
application in any jurisdiction in the world that would necessarily
be infringed by implementation of the Recommendation."
- Exclusions possible early in the development of a
specification
W3C Royalty-Free Licensing Requirements
- available to all
- all Essential Claims 'owned or controlled'
- field of use limitation
- reciprocity
- no fees
- defensive suspension
- no other conditions
- implementer may refuse
- license for life of Recommendation
- Recommendation deprecation
Disclosure
"Disclosure is required when both of the following are true:
- an individual in a Member organization receives a disclosure
request as described in section 6.3; and
- that individual has actual knowledge of a patent which the
individual believes contains Essential Claim(s) with respect to the
specification for which disclosure is requested."
If RF is declared, no disclosure is required
Exclusion
WG participants may
exclude Claims from their RF commitment:
- until 150 days after the publication of the first public
Working Draft
- 60 days after Last Call
- when joining a WG
- including unpublished patent applications
Exception Handling
- Patent Advisory Group as a platform
- Triggered if Essential Claim is not available RF
- Allows for communication and consenus
PAG may conclude that
- The initial concern has been resolved, enabling the Working Group to
continue.
- The Working Group should be instructed to consider designing around the
identified claims.
- The Team should seek further information and evaluation..
- The Working Group should be terminated.
- The Recommendation (if it has already been issued) should be
rescinded.
- Alternative licensing terms should be considered.
Patent Policy Experience
- No significant challenges so far for W3C as an organization
- Easy transition for some Members
- Paradigm shift for others
- Fact Sheet
(as of 5 Oct 2005)
- 50 specifications
- ... produced by 20 W3C Working Groups operating under the W3C
Patent Policy
- ... have 337 licensing commitments
- ... made by 172 different W3C Members
- ... with 1 disclosure
and 1 patent with excluded claims to date
Conclusions
- The W3C Patent Policy works
- It works in ambient patent systems
- It changed companies' approach to patents
- It protects the Web community and the Web's business model
Questions?
Presentation available at
http://www.w3.org/2006/Talks/0303-Patent-WIPO/
- Further questions to
- Rigo Wenning: <rigo@w3.org>
