

Apple's Statement on W3C Patent Policy (2002) - ZeroGravitas
http://www.apple.com/about/w3c/

======
ZeroGravitas
The link I submitted is dead. This eloquent defense of a patent-royalty free
web disappeared in the last couple of weeks after being posted for about 8
years. There is a Cache of the text here:

<http://xml.coverpages.org/AppleComputerPatentStatement.html>

~~~
Create
It now gives me great pleasure to introduce [...]

iPhoto and iMovie revolutionized the ability of _consumers_ to organize, edit
and display [note: the missing word, create] digital photography and video.
Putting capabilities that once _cost thousands of dollars_ into the hands of
every Mac user. Steve is also widely recognized for his ability to create an
innovative environment inside AAPL. As well as an external company image, that
is equally innovative. Just think about AAPL's marketing campaigns over the
past three decades. A promotional flier in 1976 showed Isaac Newton, sitting
under a tree, just as an apple was falling by, with the catchy exhortation, to
byte, B. Y. T. E., into an apple. There was an iconic Superbowl commercial
...techie _humor_. An iconic Superbowl commercial, telling us, that the
Macintosh was on the horizon, and ensuring us, that _we would see why 1984
would_ n't _be like 1984_. -- Hennessy

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1984_%28television_commercial%2...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1984_%28television_commercial%29)

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_hole>

~~~
philwelch
"iPhoto and iMovie revolutionized the ability of consumers to organize, edit
and display [note: the missing word, create] digital photography and video."

Have you used either of those programs? They aren't some passive entertainment
software--they exist so you can take your camera (video or still) around,
capture something, and plug it into your Mac later for editing. Apple's Mac
software, and the Mac itself, were always targeted towards people's
creativity, and there's no indication that's changed. What has changed is
Apple has discovered they can sell well-designed products to people who
_aren't_ interested in creativity, too.

~~~
Create
I tend to agree with this piece:

[http://www.osnews.com/print/23236/Why_Our_Civilization_s_Vid...](http://www.osnews.com/print/23236/Why_Our_Civilization_s_Video_Art_and_Culture_is_Threatened_by_the_MPEG-
LA)

Mandating strong legally enforced controls over image compression algorithms
do result in a READ-ONLY CULTURE:

[http://www.ted.com/talks/larry_lessig_says_the_law_is_strang...](http://www.ted.com/talks/larry_lessig_says_the_law_is_strangling_creativity.html)

The above should answer your questions in detail.

~~~
philwelch
OK, I don't see how any of that is relevant to your claim that iPhoto and
iMovie are for passive consumption of entertainment (if that's indeed what
you're saying, as you couldn't be bothered to actually tell us.)

------
koenbok
[http://web.archive.org/web/20080430070931/http://www.apple.c...](http://web.archive.org/web/20080430070931/http://www.apple.com/about/w3c/)

------
GHFigs
Note well that H.264 has nothing to do with the W3C patent policy, as it has
never been suggested for inclusion in any W3C spec. If you're looking for
evidence of Apple's current stance toward the W3C patent policy, look at
Canvas, which is part of the HTML5 spec and which Apple has disclosed their
patents[1] according to the same W3C policy[2] they supported in this
statement.

But hey, let's not let facts get in the way of a good insinuation.

[1]:[http://www.w3.org/2004/01/pp-impl/40318/status#current-
discl...](http://www.w3.org/2004/01/pp-impl/40318/status#current-disclosures)
[2]:[http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-
Policy-20040205/#sec-W3C...](http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-
Policy-20040205/#sec-W3C-RF-license)

------
houseabsolute
Has Apple actually supported any amendments to W3C standards that require
patent royalties to be paid? If they haven't asked that the video standard be
set specifically to h.264, then I don't see the problem.

------
Zak
I am reminded of why I used to love that company. What happened to it?

~~~
rbanffy
Success, most probably.

At that time, Apple was struggling to be relevant and needed a level playing
field. Now it's the undisputed leader in what seems to be two very important
segments for future growth.

Now, all it doesn't need is a level playing field.

------
goodside
Avoiding possible confusion as to what this statement refers to is plenty
reason for removal. In itself, that they took it down shouldn't imply Apple
repudiates the statement, is ashamed of it, or wants to cover it up.

~~~
jacquesm
> Avoiding possible confusion

I believe the word you are looking for is 'inconsistency'.

------
jheriko
Hiding contradictory past policy eh? Now to wait for the inevitable
explanation of how changing market forces have made closed, patented software
more viable today than it was in 2002...

