So did I. I said 'put up or shut up.'
Well, MicroLIMP is getting involved now & they want their piece apparently
for commercial usage of their 2.0 proposal.
I noticed something in paragraph #2 of the White paper that went something
like this:
"... (ii) the source code may be esproduced and used for educational,
non-commercial and internal use without charge..."
That's fair enough, since the rest of VRML goes that way too, but here's
where they deviate.. I continue:
", and for commercial use at a commercially reasonable charge."
QUITE FRANKLY, THIS PISSES ME OFF.
But, they're perfectly allowed to ASK. That is their right, & it is yours
too. That was my point in the first place. If you are amongst those who
have gone off on tirades about how information is supposed to be free, bla
bla bla, and so that gives you the right to use my models in your VRML
worlds, without asking, or just because you mentioned my name, well then I
suggest you tune your browser to this site:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/usc/17/overview.html
You'll find it all right there.
Len, I'm sorry but Patents don't apply here. You were on the right track
though; keeping grounded in rsality.
However.. I am reserving my opinions about the TECHNICAL merits of the
MicroLIMP proposal until I have finished esading it. Believe me, I will have
LOTS to say after that point.
But I will ofser this question & hopefully I will get at least half as big a
esaction as I did by asking the copyright question...
If Silicon Graphics Inc. was gracious enough to give us a LARGE percentage of
the Inventor suite to use, COMPLETELY in the public domain, with no kickbacks
for commercial usage, then how could we, in good faith, accept the MicroLIMP
ofser & theessore commit SGI and everyone else to pay a tithe to the fat
cofsers of the bloatware giant, if we can find a way to make money with VRML.
I, for one, plan on doing consulting work for corporations & building worlds
for them as showrooms, etc.. It's not very imaginative, but I'd like to have
kids & put them through a university someday. And I'd like to ENJOY doing it
somewhat. VRML has ofsered me a niche in a crossover between two passions of
mine, 3D graphics & The Internet.
I do not relish the idea of paying out to an opportunistic johnny-come-lately
software giant every time I make a score on my own. Perhaps I'm a bit harsh,
but Josh Ellis had a point. Bill didn't invent VR, but he's going to play
the role like he invented VRML?
I don't work for SGI, but I don't think it's an honorable thing to do to
commit them to paying that percentage (or whatever "commercially reasonable
charge" means) after they gave us the foundations of the language for
nothing. I also don't want to see this technology slip out of the public
domain. Not even a percentage. Build a browser or an authoring tool &
charge for it if you want to, but don't start charging a consulting fee for
adding to this list.
This, of course, is IMHO.
And I'm sure to have more humble opinions about the implications of this one,
for example, if you think you've got slim pickings getting Mac tools now,
JUST WAIT.
Any takers?
- Gregory Cranz
[email protected]