Slashdot Mirror
W3C Chastises Apple On HTML5 Patenting
angry tapir writes "The W3C (World Wide Web Consortium) is seeking to invalidate a pair of Apple patents so the underlying technologies can be used as part of a royalty-free HTML5 stack. The patented technologies are core components to the W3C's Widget Access Request Policy, which specifies how mobile applications can request sensitive material. It is one of a number of specifications that are closely tied to the W3C's next generation standard for Web pages and applications, HTML5."
...to a Borgified Steve Jobs.
"Here Lies Philip J. Fry, named for his uncle, to carry on his spirit"
About time one of the bodies stood up to a member trying to turn it into a money tap. Should have started with rambus.
Isn't this just another sign that Steve Jobs is a control freak who cares more about control and doesn't care who he shits on? Could trying to strongarm the W3C do for Steve Jobs what hacking Milly Dowler's phone did for Rupert Murdoch? Neither big business nor the media will call out Jobs so isn't it down to the people to express their anger and boycott Apple products?
After sitting with their hands under their butts for soo long, W3C doesn't really deserve much of anything.
Consider yourself spoken to.
Taking a quick scan over the Widget Access Request Policy, it sounds a lot like the android app permissions, or for that matter the old java applet security model.
Quite how Apple could patent something like that in the first place eludes me.
There should be some sort of (harsh) penalty for filing an invalid patent to stop companies just filing for every little thing.
Reading the article, the W3C believes that there is enough prior art to invalidate the patents. The patents seem very broad to me. There is the chance that Apple will provide them royalty free to the consortium as it may be a defense patent. I however didn't read any "chastising" but I suggest you not read Florian's blog. It's filled with his usual dribble of near total speculation and very little basis in reality.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
... of the wicked king Gate, who tormented his peoples by raping and pilaging the standards. For he believed that from his throne, only he could command what people who read and see, and how they should do it.
"Help us!" cried the people. "Will someone please do away with this madman and bring us technology that we can love and a man whom we can follow and trust!"
And lo, did a man step up, his man Jobs, his name noble and his deeds promising to be just. Gathering an army of Pods, he made for Gate's castle, unseating him and casting him from the realm.
His peoples set up shop, The Apple Store, and all was good for many years. The people prospered, adoring his fine gifts of Pods and Phones and TVs and Books.
Peace had come to the kingdom of Net...
... or so it seemed. For Jobs grew comfortable in his position, feeling that it was his right and his only to remain here. Turning to his closest servants his said to them: "We must keep the unworthy from this place! In order to keep Net free and clean, we must destroy the Flash!"
"Gordon?" came the reply.
"All of them," Jobs said, as he stood on his balcony. He then grinned, turning to face the seas of W3C, the Free Lands. "Tonight, the true battle begins... and nothing can save them. Not Google, nor their Androids." He patted at the papers in his cloak, the Patents of Power; the ancient documents that would mean he could never be defeated...
The Moral of the Story: Power Corrupts :)
THE HONOUR OF THE KNIGHTS - CC Licensed Sci-Fi Novel
No... never!
This is going to get real interesting, W3C has always been about fair use in my opinion. I suspect this move is to "protect" something in the IPhone (check the air quotes lol) but hampering a nacent non-prorietary technology is not good for them or the community. Better for Apple to create "framework" that enhances HTML 5 as part of their sdk.
It's nice to see someone take a stand for a change. I doubt it'll accomplish much, but it's a start...
MetalliQaZ obviously doesn't get what the Borg icon means. Hint: it doesn't merely mean "the bad guy," it's a reference to how Microsoft products came about (particularly in the 1990s).
It just doesn't apply to Apple. There are plenty of much better ways to mock Apple.
How about this. We make a national standards body, drawn from all the existing ones (or just promote ANSI or something). Make it partially government - it gets some funding, but doesn't answer to the executives or legislators. And, most important, give it the ability to "purchase" patents necessary for the standards. Classify it as eminent domain, so you don't even have the issue of companies demanding billions for their patents - they just get a flat rate in the range of $10,000 per patent.
Bam. Problem solved. It even encourages companies to make and publish standards (in hopes that they're adopted as national-level standards), as it makes them immune to patent trolls.
Can we please throw away the broken patent system, and just force company heads to duel at high noon when two companies have an argument?
What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
W3C isn't at all saying that they are trying to invalide the patents in question. What they are asking for is prior art that they might be able to use to develop the new stack on top of, so that they can avoid any infringement of the related patents. And I quote, "Such information could suggest ways to define a specification that can achieve the working group's goals without implementers infringing on the disclosed patent." And further, "By making this call, neither the WARP PAG nor the W3C make nor imply any comment whatsoever on the relevance or validity of Apple's claims."
Bill
It's my Sig and you can't have it. Mine! All Mine!
What GSM technologies? The patent pool for mobile phone access like the GSM patent pool were created BY the process that created the GSM technology. It wasn't Nokia: "GSM are creating a standard, let's Patent it", it was Nokia: "Here are some patents, will they go in to the spec?".
it should be a stevefied borg.
Microsoft is now a parasite not a predator when it comes to linux and android. The most successful parasites
are the ones the host barely notices($5 per phone...grumble,grumble now here leave me alone). Apple on the other
hand is trying to use its patents to exterminate its competitors.
Purely defensive lol!
So Apple is just protecting itself from seeing the HTML spec and patenting it themselves.
There is a new law in the pipeline that will allow patents to be granted to companies even if someone else came up with the idea first. They have to sign something saying they independently developed the idea without seeing the prior work. That means the patent system is changing from First to Invent to "First Inventor to File" .. to make that law sound constitutional, they have redefined inventor to mean anyone who comes up with something independently. Obviously such a law is heavily in favor of companies with money. So, for example if you invent something .. but don't file a patent for it.. even if you describe your invention in detail on the internet .. a company can file a patent afterwards on the exact same invention as long as there is "reasonable grounds" to believe that the company didn't see your posting on the internet. Note, this obviously won't work both ways because 1) companies alway file patents immediately 2) with their top lawyers companies can prove their invention was well known. It will also allow companies to file patents on things written in books that weren't already patented. It's all to make life easier for the patent examiner .. no more bothering with checking prior art or googling a patent filing to see if someone else had the idea first .. now they just check the patent database then do a quick Lexis search of printed published media issue the patent! No more googling -- which is where a lot of new ideas exist.
The law is going to be a dream law for patent trolls.
Just google First Inventor to File for more on this topic. It's probably too late to do anything about it though.
If the new law was in place in 2006 .. Apple could have patented the idea of making a touchscreen smartphone with a screen larger than 2.5" inches. The reason Apple couldn't patent it was because the idea of large touchscreen phones were posted on the internet and in gadget blogs (including slashdot) by people who wanted them well before Apple served their need. But if this new law was in place, all Apple would have had to do is to claim they never saw the postings and file a patent on it.
To "streamline" the patent granting process, Congress has redefined "inventor" to mean any person who independently comes up with an invention. So a person can claim they independently came up with an invention .. therefore under the law someone who tries to patent an idea that's in the HTML spec is eligible for a patent because the law states that any "inventor" (as redefined) who is first to file is able to patent it. This makes it easier and cheaper for them to grant patents without having to do time consuming and costly prior art searches.
The law is called the America Invents Act and it has already passed Senate and House and is in reconciliation. Google it.
We will see how nice Apple plays now.
This is a quote from Steve Jobs justifying their war on Flash.
"Though the operating system for the iPhone, iPod and iPad is proprietary, we strongly believe that all standards pertaining to the web should be open."
Source: http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/
Use a picture of an "asshole" then.
That seems to sum it up nicely.
This is purely a US problem in the long run. If the US wants to hobble its technical progress, that may be a problem for the whole world for a while, but other countries in Asia, Africa and South America will eventually ignore these crippling rules and take the lead in innovation. Sadly, that will spell the end of American dominance. It doesn't matter how many people you shoot or bomb in the name of "democracy" - it's unfettered inventiveness and enterprise that put the US ahead and it's not yet too late to stop shooting yourself in the foot.
You did not think that the guy who duped his best pal out of money and claimed credit for all the good ideas at Apple who had to be kicked out in 1985 to save the company could be evil?
These patents are NOT related to HTML5. These are related to the Widget specifications in the WebApps working group. The HTML5 work does not make use of this specification (though W3C widgets do use HTML5). Apple has not and there is no indication that they have any interest in doing anything that will impede the work of HTML5.
By reading this signature, you hereby agree with the content of the above comment.
Why is it we need software patents again?
-- no sig today
This is not Apple doing wrong on their own, this is capitalism's dominant model. Macroslop do this sort of crap, Google have teams of lawyers looking how to make advantage from others' IP, even your local computer tech will try on copywrong bullying to knock his competitor out of the game. You can bash Apple all you like, but the problem is rooted deeply in commercial practice and governments are too afraid to actually fix laws broken enough to allow this sort of crap.