Somehow I did not get you concluded it based on what I wrote.
Deciding not to do something is after all very different then
deciding to do it in the what is that contradictary to
technical standard.
PRA is not contrary to 'the' technical standard.
You were one of the people who did not want a standard and worked to prevent
one being agreed.
I went to their siteindex at http://www.w3.org/Help/siteindex
but could
not find relevent references there, the problem is I think I
would need to know more about which project that related to
and when the discusions took place and than it would help
narrow down the search criteria.
http://www.w3.org/2001/ppwg/
Took me like 15 seconds, just follow the 'other links' pager on the front
page and look for patent policy. It covers all new W3C standards groups and
was negotiated at length with all the stakeholders.
I find it utterly disgusting that the Apache group would claim that the
terms they had already accepted in W3C were utterly unacceptable in IETF and
decided to wreck MARID by making that claim.
"As a condition of participating in a Working Group, each participant (W3C
Members, W3C Team members, invited experts, and members of the public) shall
agree to make available under W3C RF licensing requirements any Essential
Claims related to the work of that particular Working Group. This
requirement includes Essential Claims that the participant owns and any that
the participant has the right to license without obligation of payment or
other consideration to an unrelated third party."
In the terms:
"4. may be conditioned on a grant of a reciprocal RF license (as defined in
this policy) to all Essential Claims 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."
"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;"
The issue of 'sublicensable' was brought up in the negotiations and
rejected.