Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
Which is probably what the Microsoft lawyers themselves have to answer
before they decide whether they give the answer that the patent application
does not cover the scheme as currently defined or they provide alternative
wording.
The "usual" method will be that they have filed a patent directly
governing all of this (and possibly even more). You will not get an
answer from Microsoft untill the patent office has granted the patents
(which could tike some time). These so-called submarine patents must be
avoided, so MARID should define a patent policy.
Exactly for reasons like this w3c defined a general policy that (should)
ensure that every proposal can be implemented without being sued for
patent infringement.
See: http://www.w3.org/2001/ppwg/
And quoted from: http://www.w3.org/2004/02/05-patentsummary.html
1. By virtue of participating in a Working Group, the participating
organization formally commits to the W3C Royalty-Free License
requirements for patents found to be "essential" to the Recommendation.
An "essential claim" is one that would necessarily be infringed by an
implementer of the Recommendation; in other contexts this may be called
a blocking patent.
2. Working Group participants are not required to disclosure known
patents as long as the participating organization commits to licensing
those patents according to the W3C Royalty-Free License requirements.
HTH, kind regards
Jan Wildeboer
--
| | d o m a i n ) f a c t o r y |
| Jan Wildeboer | * Premium Hosting - Premium Service * |
| Entwicklung | Oskar-Messter-Str. 33 * 85737 Ismaning |
| | jw(_at_)domainfactory(_dot_)de * +49 89 55266-351 |
.