W3C  
SYMM Patent Statements

Patent disclosures starting 5 November 2004

SMIL 2.0 patent disclosures after 5 November 2004 are managed by the W3C's patent policy implementation (IPP). If you wish to disclose a patent, please use this disclosure form.

Patent disclosures prior to 5 November 2004

The following statements are the patent disclosures and license commitments associated with the SMIL 2.0 specification as of May 22, 2001 and provided by members of the SYMM WG as required by W3C procedure. These statements may be subject to modification based on discussions during the W3C Advisory Committee review period.
W3C does not take a position regarding the validity or scope of any intellectual property right or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology, nor the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available. Copyright of the SMIL 2.0 Recommendation document and other WG deliverables is vested in the W3C.

Summary of patent statements for SMIL 2.0

This table summarizes patent statements for SMIL 2.0 from SYMM WG members who are in good standing and those in not in good standing. Either these members have provided patent disclosures and license commitments statements or have stated when joining the SYMM WG that they do not have intellectual property rights relating to the SYMM WG. The 'license summary' column is a W3C Team characterization of the Member's statement into one of three general types of licenses: 1) Royalty-free, 2) Reasonable and non-discriminatory terms (RAND), or 3) no license offer because the Member claims it has no relevant patents. This summary is not offered to suggest the exact licensing terms. The precise terms of any licence, however, are governed entirely by the Member's statement. Names in the 'Member name' column mentionned with an * are invited experts.

Summary of SMIL 2.0 Patent Statements from SYMM WG members
Member name Patent declaration License Summary

License statement

good standing
Compaq None declared Royalty-Free http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/patent-issues/1999JanMar/0005.html

no

CSELT None declared No licence http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Team/symm-review/1999JanMar/0000.html

no

CWI None declared No licence http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Team/symm-review/1999JanMar/0003.html

yes

GLOCOM None declared No licence http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Team/symm-review/1999AprJun/0000.html

no

IBM Possible Patent declared RAND http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/patent-issues/2001AprJun/0023.html

yes

INRIA None declared No licence http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Team/symm-review/1999JanMar/0004.html

yes

Intel None declared Royalty-Free http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/patent-issues/2001JanMar/0040.html

yes

Macromedia Possible Patent declared Royalty-Free http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/patent-issues/2001AprJun/0025.html

yes

Microsoft None declared Royalty-Free http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/patent-issues/2001AprJun/0024.html

yes

Netscape/AOL None declared No licence http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Team/symm-review/2000AprJun/0000.html

no

Nokia None declared No licence http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Team/symm-review/1999JulSep/0000.html

no

Oratrix None declared No licence http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Team/symm-review/2001AprJun/0000.html

yes

Panasonic (Matsushita) None declared Royalty-Free http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/patent-issues/2001AprJun/0015.html

yes

Web3D Consortium None declared No licence http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Team/symm-review/2000JanMar/0001.html

no

Philips None declared RAND http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/symm/2000Dec/0115.html

yes

RealNetworks None declared Royalty-Free http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/patent-issues/2001JanMar/0029.html

yes

WGBH * None declared No licence

yes

Provided patent statements for SMIL 2.0

Compaq Computer Corporation declaration: Feb 18 1999

"Compaq agrees that, upon adoption of this contribution as a W3C Recommendation, any W3C member will be able to obtain a license from Compaq to implement and use the technology described in this contribution for the purposes of supporting the W3C Recommendation on a royalty-free basis. One condition of this license shall be the party's agreement to not assert patent rights against Compaq and other companies for their implementation of the W3C Recommendation. Compaq expressly reserves all other rights it may have in the material and subject matter of this contribution. "Compaq expressly disclaims any and all warranties regarding this contribution including any warranty that this contribution does not violate the rights of others or is fit for a particular purpose."
To the best of my knowledge this statement covers any Compaq intellectual property rights and intentions relating to the SYMM WG program of work, especially work on temporal synchronization with HTML. -- Richard Hovey --
Available at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/patent-issues/1999JanMar/0005.html

IBM Intellectual Property Rights Claims: Fri, May 18 2001

This statement replaces previous statement:
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/patent-issues/2000JanMar/0001.html)

In response to the questions asked regarding the licensing of patents for SMIL 2.0.

IBM will provide a royalty free copyright license for both the documentation and representation of the syntax and semantics as expressed in the SMIL 1.0 and 2.0 specifications. This royalty free license is made available to the W3C and all compliant users of the W3C's SMIL 1.0 and 2.0 specifications.

IBM does have patents, the application of which may assist in the development of algorithms and functions, employed in compliant implementations of the SMIL 1.0 and 2.0 specifications. However, IBM believes that implementations can be developed which would not require a license to these patents. In conjunction with the royalty free copyrights to the syntax / semantics documentation and representation, IBM will provide non-exclusive, non-discriminatory, licenses under reasonable terms and conditions, in accordance with IBM's normal licensing policies, when IBM patents are employed in compliant SMIL 1.0 and 2.0 implementations.

The following seven IBM patents may be applicable to SMIL 1.0 and 2.0 implementations:
1. Hyperstories: organizing multimedia episodes in temporal and spatial displays, US Patent Number 5,742,283, issued 4/98
2. Multimedia document using time box diagrams, US Patent Number 5,717,438, issued 2/98.
3. System and method for globally scheduling multimedia stories, US Patent Number 5,659,790, Issued 8/97
4. Method for automatically obtaining spatial layout for multimedia presentations, US Patent Number 5,669,006, Issued 9/97
5. Automatic Indexing and aligning of audio and text using speech recognition, US Patent 5,649,060, Issued 7/97
6. Authoring knowledge-based systems using interactive directed graphs, US Patent Number 5,673,369, Issued 9/97
7. Method and system for providing a non-rectangular floor plan, US Patent 5,398,195, Issued 2/92 -- David C. Fallside --
Available at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/patent-issues/2001AprJun/0023.html

Intel's revised SYMM/SMIL IPR statement: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 

We have been asked by W3C to alter our patent policy statement for SMIL 2.0
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/patent-issues/2001JanMar/0031.html).

This statement replaces all previous statements.

Intel has not performed a search of its patent portfolio for the purpose of determining whether Intel has any patents or patent applications (collectively "Patents") that relate to the SYMM Working Group. Intel is not willing to waive its rights in its relevant Patents, if any. However, subject to the conditions in this statement, Intel's licensing policy for Patents that read on a future SMIL 2.0 Recommendation will be to negotiate licenses on royalty free terms. This policy shall apply only to Patent claims that read on Essential Technology as defined below. This undertaking remains valid only as long as such Recommendation exists and applies only to parties who have made an equivalent undertaking. The final contents of any relevant Recommendation are not currently known so Intel reserves the right to opt out of this licensing offer. If Intel determines that it is not willing to grant licenses on royalty free terms, Intel will endeavor to provide notification within four weeks following the public release of the Final Last Call Working Draft. The current W3C rules for how much a draft can change after Last Call without repeating Last Call are unclear If the draft is changed substantively after the public release of the Final Last Call Working Draft (one would expect another public Last Call in this case), then notification, if any, will occur within 4 weeks of the final time the draft enters Proposed Recommendation. Neither Aaron Cohen, the Intel SYMM Working Group representative, nor Wayne Carr, Intel's W3C AC Representative knows of any relevant IPR.

The definition of essential technology is taken from the W3C Patent Policy Framework Proposal-W3C Working Draft 28 September 2000: "Definition of Essential Technology.

1. "Essential" means that an implementation of the specification would necessarily infringe claims of a patent or patent application owned or controlled by the Member at any time during the life of the Working Group and the specification. A claim is necessarily infringed hereunder only when it is not possible to avoid infringing it because there is no commercially plausible non-infringing alternative for implementing the specification, including the protocols, application program interfaces, service provider interfaces, and/or data structures disclosed with particularity in the specification in order to enable products to interoperate, interconnect or communicate as defined within the specification.

2. Notwithstanding the foregoing, essential claims shall not include any claims other than as set forth above even if contained in the same patent as essential claims; or that read solely on any implementations of any portion of the specification that are not required by the specification, or that, if licensed, would require a payment of royalties by the licensor to unaffiliated third parties. Moreover, essential claims shall not include (i) any enabling technologies that may be necessary to make or use any product or portion thereof that complies with the specification but are not themselves expressly set forth in the specification (e.g., semiconductor manufacturing technology, compiler technology, object oriented technology, basic operating system technology, and the like); or (ii) the implementation of other published standards developed elsewhere and merely referred to in the body of the specification, or (iii) any portions of any product and any combinations thereof the purpose or function of which is not required for compliance with the specification. For purposes of this definition, the specification shall be deemed to include only architectural and interconnection requirements and shall not include any implementation examples unless such implementation examples are expressly identified as being included as part of the specification. -- Carr Wayne --
Available at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/patent-issues/2001JanMar/0040.html

Macromedia's revised SYMM/SMIL IPR statement: May 21 2001

We have been asked by W3C to change our Intellectual Property Rights statement for SYMM/SMIL Working Group. This replaces our previous statement relating to SYMM Activity dated March 8, 1999.
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/patent-issues/1999JanMar/0007.html)

I believe Macromedia has intellectual property rights related to SYMM/SMIL including but not limited to patent and patent applications that are not Essential Claims (discussed below), trade secrets, trademarks and copyright related to Macromedia technologies.

Upon adoption of W3C SYMM/SMIL 2.0 Recommendation ("Recommendation"), Macromedia agrees to negotiate licenses for Essential Claims, as defined below, needed for the purpose of implementing the Recommendation on a royalty-free basis. This policy shall apply only to Essential Claims for the Recommendation and this undertaking remains valid only as long as such Recommendation exists and applies only to such parties who have made an equivalent undertaking. Among other conditions to be determined by Macromedia, one condition of this license shall be the licensee's agreement and covenant to never assert patent rights against Macromedia and/or other third parties for implementation of the Recommendation.

Subject to the conditions of this statement, Macromedia expressly reserves all other rights it may have in the material and subject matter of any contribution including but not limited to patents and patent applications that are not Essential Claims, trade secret, trademark and copyright. Macromedia expressly disclaims any and all warranties regarding such contribution including any warranty that this contribution does not violate the rights of others or is fit for a particular purpose.

The definition of Essential Claims is taken from the W3C Patent Policy Framework Proposal-W3C Working Draft April 5, 2001:
"Essential Claims" shall mean all claims in any patent or patent application, in any jurisdiction in the world, that a Member (or a licensor or licensee, with reference to entities other than Members) owns, or under which a Member (or a licensor or licensee) has the right to grant licenses without obligation of payment or other consideration to an unrelated third party, that would necessarily be infringed by implementation of the Recommendation. A claim is necessarily infringed hereunder only when it is not possible to avoid infringing it because there is no non-infringing alternative for implementing the required portions of the Recommendation. Existence of a non-infringing alternative shall be judged based on the state-of-the-art at the time the specification becomes a Recommendation.

The following are expressly excluded from and shall not be deemed to constitute Essential Claims: (1) any claims other than as set forth above even if contained in the same patent as Essential Claims; and (2) claims which would be infringed only by [a] portions of an implementation that are not required by the Recommendation, or [b] enabling technologies that may be necessary to make or use any product or portion thereof that complies with the Recommendation but are not themselves expressly set forth in the Recommendation (e.g., semiconductor manufacturing technology, compiler technology, object oriented technology, basic operating system technology, and the like); or [c] the implementation of technology developed elsewhere and merely incorporated by reference in the body of the Recommendation.

For purposes of this definition, the Recommendation shall be deemed to include only architectural and interoperability requirements and shall not include any implementation examples or any other material that merely illustrates the requirements of the Recommendation. -- Kevin Lynch, Macromedia --
Available at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/patent-issues/2001AprJun/0025.html

Microsoft's revised IPR Statement to SYMM WG for SMIL 2.0 : May 21 2001

Capitalized and bolded terms below are defined in the Proposed Draft Patent Policy being developed by the W3C Patent Policy Working Group. Microsoft will grant a Royalty Free license under Microsoft's Essential Claims that cover the SMIL 2.0 Candidate/Proposed Recommendation to make, have made, use, sell, have sold, implement and distribute those portions of products that implement the SMIL 2.0 Candidate Recommendation for the purpose of complying with the SMIL 2.0 Candidate/Proposed Recommendation. This license shall expire at such time that the SMIL 2.0 Candidate/Proposed Recommendation is withdrawn, or becomes a Recommendation, or two years from the date this statement is submitted to the W3C, whichever occurs first. This license is expressly conditioned upon and shall only take effect if the other members of the SYMM Working Group grant Royalty Free licenses to their Essential Claims that cover the SMIL 2.0 Candidate/Proposed Recommendation. In addition, Microsoft expressly reserves the right to convert this license to a RAND license with respect to any Licensee who refuses to license its Essential Claims covering any subsequent Recommendation, Proposed Recommendation or Candidate Recommendation (collectively referred to as "Other Subsequent Recommendation") in which the SMIL 2.0 Candidate/Proposed is a normative reference on a Royalty Free basis to Microsoft for Microsoft's implementation of such Other Subsequent Recommendation.

If the SMIL 2.0 Candidate/Proposed Recommendation proceeds unchanged to become the W3C's SMIL 2.0 Recommendation, Microsoft will grant a Royalty Free license under Microsoft's Essential Claims that cover the SMIL 2.0 Recommendation to make, have made, use, sell, have sold, implement and distribute those portions of products that implement the SMIL 2.0 Recommendation for the purpose of complying with the SMIL 2.0 Recommendation. This license is expressly conditioned upon and shall only take effect if the other members of the SYMM Working Group grant Royalty Free licenses to their Essential Claims that cover the SMIL 2.0 Recommendation. In addition, Microsoft expressly reserves the right to convert this license to a RAND license with respect to any Licensee who refuses to license its Essential Claims covering any subsequent Recommendation Proposed Recommendation or Candidate Recommendation (collectively referred to as "Other Subsequent Recommendation") in which the SMIL 2.0 Recommendation is a normative reference on a Royalty Free basis to Microsoft for Microsoft's implementation of such Other Subsequent Recommendation. Microsoft expressly reserves all other rights it may have in the material and subject matter of its Contributions.

Microsoft expressly disclaims any and all warranties regarding its Contributions including any warranty that its Contributions do not violate the rights of others or is fit for a particular purpose. -- DeLuca, Mark (Woodcock Washburn) --

Available at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/patent-issues/2001AprJun/0024.html

Panasonic's (Matsushita) IPR relating to SYMM Activity: May 08 2001

Matsushita has not performed a search of its patent portfolio for the purpose of determining whether Matsushita has any patents or patent applications (collectively "Patents") that relate to the SYMM Working Group. Matsushita is not willing to waive its rights in its relevant Patents, if any. However, Matsushita anticipates that its licensing policy for Patents that read on a future SMIL 2.0 Recommendation will be to negotiate licenses on royalty free terms. This policy shall apply only to Patent claims that read on Essential Technology as defined below. This undertaking remains valid only as long as such Recommendation exists and applies only to parties who have made an equivalent undertaking and have agreed not to enforce against Matsushita any patent rights it may have that are essential in order to practice the W3C specification in a reasonably commercially viable manner. The final contents of any relevant Recommendation are not currently known so Matsushita reserves the right to opt out of this licensing offer. If Matsushita determines that it is not willing to grant licenses on royalty free terms, Matsushita will endeavor to provide notification within four weeks following the public release of the Final Last Call Working Draft. The current W3C rules for how much a draft can change after Last Call without repeating Last Call are unclear. If a Candidate Recommendation or Proposed Recommendation is changed substantively without being returned to Last Call (one would expect a return to Last Call in this case), then notification, if any, will occur within 4 weeks of the final time the draft enters Proposed Recommendation.

The definition of essential technology is taken from the W3C Patent Policy Framework Proposal-W3C Working Draft 28 September 2000: "Definition of Essential Technology.
1. "Essential" means that an implementation of the specification would necessarily infringe claims of a patent or patent application owned or controlled by the Member at any time during the life of the Working Group and the specification. A claim is necessarily infringed hereunder only when it is not possible to avoid infringing it because there is no commercially plausible non-infringing alternative for implementing the specification, including the protocols, application program interfaces, service provider interfaces, and/or data structures disclosed with particularity in the specification in order to enable products to interoperate, interconnect or communicate as defined within the specification.
2. Notwithstanding the foregoing, essential claims shall not include any claims other than as set forth above even if contained in the same patent as essential claims; or that read solely on any implementations of any portion of the specification that are not required by the specification, or that, if licensed, would require a payment of royalties by the licensor to unaffiliated third parties. Moreover, essential claims shall not include (i) any enabling technologies that may be necessary to make or use any product or portion thereof that complies with the specification but are not themselves expressly set forth in the specification (e.g., semiconductor manufacturing technology, compiler technology, object oriented technology, basic operating system technology, and the like); or (ii) the implementation of other published standards developed elsewhere and merely referred to in the body of the specification, or (iii) any portions of any product and any combinations thereof the purpose or function of which is not required for compliance with the specification. For purposes of this definition, the specification shall be deemed to include only architectural and interconnection requirements and shall not include any implementation examples unless such implementation examples are expressly identified as being included as part of the specification. --Yasunori Tanaka (General Manager, Core Software Development Center, Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd.(a.k.a Panasonic))
Available at:http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/patent-issues/2001AprJun/0015.html

Philips IPR policy: 15 Dec 2000

With regards to the IPR policy of Philips I can inform that the Philips policy for W3C Recommendations is that Philips is prepared to grant on non-discriminatory basis, to any party requesting it, licenses on commercially reasonable terms and conditions for patents deemed necessary for the implementation of such Recommendation (essential patents), for use in conformance with such Recommendation.
However this undertaking remains valid only as long as such Recommendation exists and applies only to parties who have made an equivalent undertaking.

With regard to the SMIL 2.0 Recommendation I am not aware of Philips patents which are necessary for the implementation of the Recommendation. -- Warner ten Kate --
Available at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/symm/2000Dec/0115.html

RealNetworks' revised IPR statement for SYMM WG: February 8, 2001

This is RealNetworks' revised IPR declaration for the SMIL 2.0 specification process.

We've been asked by W3C to update our patent policy statement for SYMM. This replaces our previous statement.

This policy shall apply only to Patent claims that read on Essential Technology as defined below. This undertaking remains valid only as long as such W3C Recommendation exists and applies only to parties who have made an equivalent undertaking.

RealNetworks agrees that, upon adoption of this contribution as a W3C Recommendation, any individual or legal entity will be able to obtain a license from RealNetworks to implement and use the Essential Technology described in the W3C Recommendation for the purpose of implementing the W3C Recommendation on a royalty-free basis. One condition of this license shall be the party's agreement to not assert patent rights against RealNetworks and other companies for their implementation of the W3C Recommendation. RealNetworks expressly reserves all other rights it may have in the material and subject matter of this contribution. RealNetworks expressly disclaims any and all warranties regarding this contribution including any warranty that this contribution does not violate the rights of others or is fit for a particular purpose.

The definition of Essential Technology is taken from the W3C Patent Policy Framework Proposal-W3C Working Draft 28 September 2000: "Definition of Essential Technology", with examples altered to clarify applicability to RealNetworks' technology.

1. "Essential Technology" means that an implementation of the specification would necessarily infringe claims of a patent or patent application owned or controlled by the Member at any time during the life of the Working Group and the specification. A claim is necessarily infringed hereunder only when it is not possible to avoid infringing it because there is no commercially plausible non-infringing alternative for implementing the specification, including the protocols, application program interfaces, service provider interfaces, and/or data structures disclosed with particularity in the specification in order to enable products to interoperate, interconnect or communicate as defined within the specification.

2. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Essential Technology claims shall not include any claims other than as set forth above even if contained in the same patent as Essential Technology claims; or that read solely on any implementations of any portion of the specification that are not required by the specification, or that, if licensed, would require a payment of royalties by the licensor to unaffiliated third parties. Moreover, Essential Technology claims shall not include (i) any enabling technologies that may be necessary to make or use any product or portion thereof that complies with the specification but are not themselves expressly set forth in the specification (e.g., streaming media technology, digital rights management technology, CODEC technology, object oriented technology and the like); or (ii) the implementation of other published standards developed elsewhere and merely referred to in the body of the specification, or (iii) any portions of any product and any combinations thereof the purpose or function of which is not required for compliance with the specification. For purposes of this definition, the specification shall be deemed to include only architectural and interconnection requirements and shall not include any implementation examples unless such implementation examples are expressly identified as being included as part of the specification. . -- Rob Lanphier --
Available at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/patent-issues/2001JanMar/0029.html


Thierry Michel tmichel@w3.org

Last revised by $Id: Disclosures.html,v 1.30 2001/05/16 11:26:44 djweitzner Exp $