Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!wuarchive!cs.utexas.edu!longway!std-unix From: domo@tsa.co.uk (Dominic Dunlop) Newsgroups: comp.std.unix Subject: Re: correction (compression algorithm patents) Message-ID: <795@longway.TIC.COM> Date: 6 Jul 90 10:27:31 GMT References: <387@usenix.ORG> <787@longway.TIC.COM> Sender: std-unix@longway.TIC.COM Reply-To: uunet!tsa.co.uk!domo@usenix.ORG Organization: The Standard Answer Ltd. Lines: 80 Approved: jsq@longway.tic.com (Moderator, John S. Quarterman) From: Dominic Dunlop >From: jsh@usenix.org (Jeffrey S. Haemer) quoting Randall Howard > > The ramifications [of the fact that the LZ and LZW compression >algorithms are patented ] for POSIX.2a are unclear. Currently, there >are members of the working group that say that they would object if a >patented >algorithm were required by the standard if ANY FEE WHATSOEVER >(even if $1) were required to use it. (There are, however, precedents >for standards working in areas of patents in such areas as networking, >modems, and hardware bus structures. It appears that we software people >have not "grown up" as much when it comes to issues of licensing. For the record, from (normative) Annex A of IEC/ISO Directives -- Part 2: Methodology, 1989: If, in exceptional cases, technical reasons justify the preparation of an International Standard in terms which include that use of a patented item, there is no objection in principle to such a step, even if the terms are such that there is no alternative means of compliance. In such a case, the following procedures shall be complied with. a) ISO and IEC cannot give authoritative or comprehensive information about evidence, validity and scope of patent and like rights but it is desirable that the fullest information be disclosed. Therefore the originator of a proposal of such a kind shall draw the technical committee's or subcommittee's attention to any known patent and like rights on a worldwide basis or any known pending applications, although ISO and IEC are not in a position to guarantee the authority of any such information. b) If the proposal is accepted on technical grounds, the originator shall ask any known patent holder for a statement that he would be willing to negotiate licences under patent and like rights for applicants throughout the world on reasonable terms and conditions. A record of the patent holder's statement shall be placed in the files of the ISO Central Secretariat or the IEC Central Office, as appropriate, and shall be referred to in the relevant international standard. If the patent holder does not provide such a statement, the technical committee shall not proceed with the inclusion of the patented item unless the respective Council gives permission. c) Should it be revealed after publication of the International Standard that licences under a patent and like rights cannot be obtained under reasonable terms and conditions, the International Standard shall be referred back to the technical committee for further consideration. (The Councils of IEC and ISO are defined as ``the ultimate authority for the technical work...'') And from section 7, IEEE Standards Manual, April 1988: 7. Patents There is no objection in principle to drafting a proposed IEEE standard in terms that include the use of a patented item, if it is considered that technical reasons justify this approach. 7.1 Disclaimer The following note shall appear in all IEEE standards: ``IEEE standards documents are adopted by the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers without regard to whether their adoption may involve patents on articles, materials, or processes. Such adoption does not assume any liability to any patent owner, nor does it assume any obligation to any parties whatever adopting the standards documents.'' (This note duly appears in IEEE Std. 1003.1:1988, facing the title page.) Think I prefer ISO's cautious but realistic approach to the IEEE's mere shrugging off of any blame for any consequences whatever of any action it cares to take. -- Dominic Dunlop Volume-Number: Volume 20, Number 109