Today, Tim Berners-Lee, director of the W3C and
inventor of the Web, has responded to a call for
comments from the US Copyright Office, regarding
a proposal to restrict users to only one vendor
browser in order to submit forms to that office. He raises a number of practical issues, suggesting that use of standards is the obvious solution. He makes it clear that he is not attacking IE: The failing of the proposed implementation of the preregistration system is its lack of support for standards, not its choice of software. He mentions security issues , which can and have arisen in connection with all browsers. As it happens, there was one yesterday involving IE, and some responded to the fact that there is currently no patch for it by suggesting that you use a different browser at least temporarily. More information on it here, including the suggestion to turn off ActiveX and use it on "trusted" web sites only. ActiveX again. Yet web designers will sometimes tell you they can't live without it. Some of us would much rather, please. I personally would trade a little less whizbang for a lot more security. But when a warning like yesterday's comes up, and a government site requires IE-only, then what do you do?
You'll notice he sent it by hand, as well as putting it on the Web. That is because tomorrow is the deadline, and they require paper letters, not email. I'm thinking the Copyright Office might like to compare the paper letter with the one on the Web. If they do, they will notice that the one they got on paper will type out where the links are to the references; on the Web, all you have to do is click. Just a suggestion.
*******************************
22 August 2005
By Hand and on the Web at
http://www.w3.org/2005/08/22-w3c-prereg-standards-comments.html"
Office of the General Counsel
U.S. Copyright Office
James Madison Memorial Building, Room LM-401
101 Independence Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20559-6000
In Re: 37 CFR Part 202 [Docket No. RM 2005-9]
The United States Copyright Office has requested
1 comment on whether a requirement that
certain online forms be submitted only through
the use of a single vendor's World Wide Web
browser, to the exclusion of any other hardware
or software product or service designed to
conform with Web standards. Such a policy, even
if implemented for a short time, would impose a
number of practical barriers on those seeking to
exercise their pre-registration rights. The
proposed system would be contrary to at least
the spirit of Federal information policy adopted
by the E-Government Act of 2002, as well as
important OMB management directives regarding
Federal Enterprise Architecture and the
directive to use voluntary consensus standards.
At the outset, we would like to stress that
nothing in this letter should be construed as a
criticism of Microsoft's Internet Explorer,
which is one of the leading browsers in the
field. We would write the same letter if the
choice was to offer support solely for Mozilla
Firefox, Safari, or any other product. The
failing of the proposed implementation of the
preregistration system is its lack of support
for standards, not its choice of software.
As a background to the Copyright Office's
decision to attempt to offer services over the
Web without the use of standards, it is
important to keep in mind the Web was born and
achieved widespread use only because of a
commitment to open, vendor-neutral standards.
The early Web faced the threat of fragmentation
through the actions of competing browser
vendors. These actions actually jeopardized the
broader adoption of the technology. In response
to this threat, we created the World Wide Web
Consortium as a global organization, currently
over 390 members, for the purpose of enabling
the ongoing development of Web standards. Since
those early days in 1994, we have witnessed the
creation of tremendous opportunities, technical,
social, and commercial, the world over, in large
part due to the commitments of corporate and
not-for-profit entities to the development of
technical standards that may be implemented in
diverse settings and for diverse purposes. Since
then, those content providers, software vendors
and service providers who have adopted a
standards-based strategy have seen benefits not
possible with a proprietary approach.
Proposed Single-Vendor Preregistration Service
Will Exclude Large Classes of Potential Users
From a practical perspective, the single-vendor
restriction will deny preregistration benefits
entirely to broad classes of creators of
covered copyrighted works. The flaw in the
proposed implementation of the preregistration
system lies in the failure to rely on voluntary
consensus standards that are widely adopted and
readily suited to the task identified by the
Copyright Office. To illustrate the
disadvantages of departing from standards-based
solutions, we will consider the impact of the
specific design proposed in the Supplementary
Notice. While a large proportion of the
marketplace uses the Microsoft Internet
Explorer to browse the Web, certain classes of
users will find it either impossible or
extremely inconvenient to do so. Of the three
popular desktop computing platforms in use at
the present -- Microsoft Windows, Apple Mac OS,
and Linux/Unix -- the latest versions of
Internet Explorer are only available for the
Microsoft Windows family of operating
systems.
2 In some cases, users or their
institutions may curtail the use of a browser
temporarily or permanently based on flaws in
the particular software product. So even though
a user may have a software platform which would
support Internet Explorer, that service may be
disabled for some reason. Note that this is not
a problem unique to Internet Explorer. Various
browsers have suffered security breaches and
the response, often, is to stop using that
browser either permanently or until the
security bug is fixed. During that time, the
user would be entirely unable to use the
preregistration system. A standards-based
strategy would ensure that users can continue
to access Copyright Office services
notwithstanding the transient security problems
that are inevitable for any single piece of
software and have plagued all of the popular browsers at one time or another.
While one generally considers the Web to be a
service used from a desktop or laptop computer,
today's Web applications are become increasingly
mobile and reliant upon browsers written for
cell phones, PDAs and other non-PC devices. Many
of these devices come with standards-compliant
Web browsers, but users often have no choice
whatsoever in the type of browsing software
installed. Some mobile devices are available
with mobile versions of Internet Explorer, but
many are not. The NPRM specifically cites the
need to preregister movie dailies. It is easy to
imagine that one would want to make such
registration immediately upon completing a film
shoot. In that case, the most practical and
timely option might be to access the Copyright
Office PRE form from a mobile Web-enabled
cellphone or PDA. Restricting access to Internet
Explorer only would then unfairly exclude those
creators from the benefits of preregistration.
One of the distinct benefits of online access to
government services is the increased
opportunities it offers to people with
disabilities. The policy of requiring use of a
particular software product for accessing
Copyright Office services, however, could put
Web users with disabilities at a significant
disadvantage. Users with disabilities often must
augment their browsing software with special
assistive software and/or hardware ("assistive
technology"). The combination of assistive
technology and Web browser that a given
individual with disabilities has installed and
configured may or may not be based on Internet
Explorer, given the varied accessibility
features of mainstream browsers. In addition,
some individuals with disabilities rely on
alternative browsers (for instance, "talking
browsers") that are designed to meet their
specific needs. Users with disabilities rely on
a standards-based Web to ensure that services
they access on the Web will be usable through
the variety of mainstream software and
specialized assistive technologies that they
use. A single-vendor strategy such as that
proposed here will force many disabled users to
re-tool their software and hardware environment,
or face exclusion from the preregistration
services. The practical effect of this exclusion
will not only be on content creators themselves,
but also on any employees of content creation
firms whose job it is to make preregistration submissions.
Single Vendor Service is Contrary to Federal Information Policy
In addition to the numerous practical
impediments that the proposed vendor-specific,
non-standard implementation will pose, we
believe that the strategy of designing a
government Web service around a specific piece
of software as opposed to seeking conformance
with existing and widely used voluntary industry
standards is contrary to Federal information
policy. Congressional enactments like the
E-Government Act of 2002 clearly encourage "the
use of the Internet and emerging technologies
within and across Government agencies to provide
citizen-centric Government information and
services".
3 In implementing the policies of
the E-Gov Act, the Office of Management and
Budget has stated that agency policy should seek
to minimize "burden on business by re-using data
previously collected or using XML or other open
standards to receive transmissions".
4 The
recommended strategy is to "employ 'smart'
buying practices to reduce acquisition and
support costs, including software asset
management; and increase the use of
standards-compliant software".
4 According to
longstanding policy (see OMB Circular A-119
5), standards compliance entails using
"voluntary consensus standards in lieu of
government-unique standards except where
inconsistent with law or otherwise impractical."
We can see no reason why a standards-compliant
solution is impractical. If it is, there is
nothing in the NPRM that explains why. Hence, we
believe that the Copyright Office should
reconsider its proposal to implement a single
vendor solution and instead pursue a
standards-based policy. This will ensure that
all eligible beneficiaries will have access to
Copyright Office services, and that the Office
is compliant with Federal law and policy, and it
is likely to save the Office money in the long run.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/
Tim Berners-Lee,
Director, World Wide Web Consortium
/s/
Daniel J. Weitzner,
Technology and Society Domain Leader, World Wide Web Consortium
Notes
1The Supplemental notice of proposed
rulemaking "seeks information whether any
potential preregistration filers would have
difficulties using Internet Explorer (version
5.1 or higher) to file preregistration claims."
More generally, "in the interest of achieving
support for browsers in the Office's
preregistration processing environment, this
notice inquires whether (and why) an eligible
party who anticipates preregistering a claim on
the electronic-only form will not be able to use
Internet Explorer to do so, or will choose not
to preregister if it is necessary to use
Internet Explorer."
http://www.copyright.gov/fedreg/2005/70fr44878.html (accessed August 20, 2005).
2 Some may consider the use of Internet
Explorer on the Macintosh platform impractical
as Microsoft announced in 2003 that it stopped
development of Internet Explorer for the
Macintosh. See Ian Fried, "Microsoft: No new
versions of IE for Mac," CNET News.com, June 13,
2003. http://news.com.com/2100-1045_3-1017126.html (accessed August 20, 2005).
3 E-Government Act of 2002, Public Law 107-347,
§ 2 (b)(5).
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=107_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ347.107.pdf
(accessed August 20, 2005).
4 Implementing the President's Management
Agenda for E-Government, E-Government Strategy,
(April 2003).
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/2003egov_strat.pdf
(accessed August 20, 2005).
5 OMB Circular A-119, (February 10, 1998).
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/a119/a119.html
(accessed August 20, 2005).
|