W3C was created in October 1994 with the mission to “lead the world wide web to its full potential by developing common protocols that promote its evolution and ensure its interoperability.” W3C works with developers, software makers and others in order to produce these web standards which can then be used by anyone wishing to build web software. Previously, the technology involved has either been absent of patent, or any patent rights in respect of the technology have been waived.
W3C’s royalty-free (RF) policy was adopted with the aim of ensuring the universal application of common standards. However, this policy may now be in jeopardy. A working group comprising representatives from, amongst others, Microsoft, Apple Computer and Hewlett-Packard, has proposed the adoption of “reasonable, non-discriminatory” (RAND) licensing terms. Such a licensing proposal would allow creators of technology to claim rights or royalties in respect of their intellectual property.
Although a RAND licence would not allow the patent holder to discriminate between licensees or add additional conditions to a specific licensee, the concept has been criticised for allowing undue influence by commercial companies over the standards process.
In addition, the RAND proposal has been accused of hypocrisy by promoting the very discrimination it purports to avoid. Richard Stallman, president of the Free Software Foundation explained that although the policy may not discriminate against a specific person, it does “discriminate against the free software community, and that makes it unreasonable.”
In support of the RAND policy, Uttam Narsu, an analyst with Giga Information Group argues that adopting a standard simply because it is royalty free may mean the adoption of second rate technology. “It may be that the adopted standard is the second or third choice, because the preferred technology was patented.”
Although a final decision on the policy is not expected from W3C until February 2002, the group has been criticised for lack of communication and public consultation in relation to the matter with calls for an extension of the public review period.
If the proposal is subsequently approved, its opponents speculate that it will lead only to infighting amongst patent holders, escalating costs for web developers and an end to W3C’s ideal of universal standardisation. Bruce Pezzlo, president of Plum Computer Consulting speculates that, “standards will take too long to become adopted, and will not be widely adopted should the cost of fees become prohibitively expensive.”