<html><body>Howdy, <br><br>I've worked on a few protocols and document standards over the years. One thing I've noticed is the tendency of certain players to either partially support an Internet standard, or add features to it making it no longer cross-platform. There are too many examples to list. <br><br>My question is: are there any copyright licenses that are open, but have features designed to combat these practices? <br><br>I am interested in licensing a copyright for a protocol. This protocol is fairly simple, and is designed to be extensible. I would like to say: <br><br>____________________<br><br>If you use this protocol you must support _all_ features of a major version. You may extend the protocol as much as you like provided your extensions live in this namespace which has been provided for that purpose. Any implimentation that does not meet these criteria, will have its license revoked. This copyright is collectively owned by those who have published software which is in compliance with these license terms. <br>____________________<br><br>My point here, is that people who support and develop free software and open standards should have some litigious reciprocity available against vendors who don't play nice. Malicious vendors should be responsible to everybody they screw, not just the original authors. <br><br>So anything out there like that? <br>Opinions? Comments? <br><br>Thanks in advance! <br>Matthew Sibley <br>msibley@itoperators.com<br><br> <br><br> </body></html>