[OpenSCAD] New 3MF file format

doug moen doug at moens.org
Fri May 1 16:16:20 EDT 2015

It's not FRAND. Option 2 is "RAND-RF (Royalty-Free)", which is different.

In the parent document it says "3MF members have agreed to make their
necessary patent claims available for implementations of the 3MF Core
Specification and 3MF Materials Specification on a royalty-free basis."

The wording you object to means basically something like this: "if your
software already violated our patents, independent of 3MF, then adding 3MF
support to your software doesn't eliminate the prior patent infringement".

I don't advocate living in fear of uknown patents. Refusing to implement
3MF because we don't like Microsoft is one thing, and could be a legitimate
community decision. But I don't see that 3MF support would create any legal
risk for us. The point of the royalty-free patent grant is to eliminate
that risk, after all.

On 1 May 2015 at 10:50, Ed Nisley <ed.nisley at pobox.com> wrote:

> Thoughts?
> Proprietary lock-in.
> This phrase from Appendix A tells you all you need to know about the
> patent licensing: "on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms". If
> the FRAND patent model worked, the mobile phone and tablet industry would
> be a happy garden of mutual innovation, rather than a dismal swamp of
> litigation.
> The broad exceptions in Item 3 of Option 2 tells you that anything you
> create *will* be deemed infringing, because you'll be innovating in a
> related field that's not covered by the FRAND license. The only question
> will be whether you have enough money to make you a worthwhile target.
> I. Am. Not. A. Lawyer.
> --
> Ed
> softsolder.com
> _______________________________________________
> OpenSCAD mailing list
> Discuss at lists.openscad.org
> http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openscad.org/pipermail/discuss_lists.openscad.org/attachments/20150501/2611f065/attachment-0002.html>

More information about the Discuss mailing list