[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RAND for Requirements?
This message continues (and attempts to help transfer) a thread started on the 'oasis-charter-discuss' list. Mary McRae (OASIS TC Admin) has requested [1] that the conversation be moved to the OASIS Member Discuss list (oasis-member-discuss). The thread included some questions about RAND TCs and specs at OASIS per the SOA-TEL Charter and its comment log [2], together with explanations from TC Proposers about the rationale for selecting RAND IPR Mode [3]. My contribution here is minimal, somewhat tangential, and distinctly personal (not corporate/official): in the discussion about cogency of rationale for OASIS RAND TCs, I think we should not lose sight of two broad goals that have been key to the OASIS message over many years: openness [0] and open specification implementability. The posting by Dazza (Daniel) Greenwood [4] touches on openness, and I think reminds us of that concern. A recent blog posting by an IBM employee (Arnaud Le Hors) touches on the matter of RAND-based standards, and may be of interest in the context of this current conversation. Would RAND-based specifications from telcos working in an OASIS RAND TC "interoperate" at the licensing level with non-telco RF Web services specifications? Would RAND-based licenses attached to telco specs enable safe implementation by open-source software development projects and companies -- or only by commercial software vendors prepared to handle RAND licensing terms? ---------------------------------------------------------------- From: Arnaud's Open blog Opinions on open source and standards "Open Standards and Globalization" http://lehors.wordpress.com/2008/10/30/open-standards-and-globalization/ "Global Application" It reads: Encourage emerging and developed economies to both adopt open global standards and to participate in the creation of those standards. The Global Application principle cannot be separated from the principle of 'Implementability' which reads: Collaborate with standards bodies and developer communities to ensure that open software interoperability standards are freely available and implementable. Indeed, one of the major barriers to global adoption by developing countries of the so called 'international standards' is the toll on implementing them. Whether it is about paying just to access the document or about paying royalties to foreign companies for patents that read on the standard, the price tag this constitutes is just not acceptable to emerging countries. They already face enough challenges otherwise. The European Commission as well as countries like India are trying to move the ball by developing policies that restrict public procurement to 'open standards' which they define as being royalty free. This is provoking reactions from various organizations that want to stop this movement. Their main contention appears to be that we've been developing standards for decades on a RAND basis and adopting a royalty free only policy will rule out hundreds of existing standards and products. I say: tough! It's about time that we recognize that the way we've been doing standards isn't going to work anymore. And we just cannot expect the world to be shackled by the way we've been doing things in the past. Traditionally, IT standards have for the most part been developed by the western world and then pushed onto the rest of the world. A RAND based system might have been fine in an environment where the odds were balanced by the fact that all parties had more or less similar stakes in the game. But this doesn't work when you add a bunch of new players who find themselves at the table empty handed. So, it's not surprise that the rest of the world is telling us 'No, thanks'. Can we really blame them? Those that cling onto the old ways are part of the past. The future simply cannot be based on a grossly unbalanced system that gives a hudge advantage to some parties. Getting rid of the toll on implementating standards is the price to pay to see them globally adopted. Failures to recognize that simple fact and attempts to derail the trends set by the European Commission and the likes are simply a waste of time. ---------------------------------------------------------------- - Robin Cover [speaking only as an individual, representing nobody] ==== References: [0] Open Standards (YMMV) http://xml.coverpages.org/openStandards.html [1] move the conversation to OASIS Member Discuss group/list post to: oasis-member-discuss@lists.oasis-open.org archives: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/oasis-member-discuss/ subscribe: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/oasis-member-discuss/ see: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/oasis-charter-discuss/200811/msg00019.html [2] questions about RAND TCs and specs at OASIS * Jacques Durand * Dennis Hamilton * Arshad Noor * Farrukh Najmi * Patrick Durusau * Jeff Mischkinsky * Dazza (Daniel) Greenwood Dazza (Daniel) Greenwood <civicsdotcom-econtracts@yahoo.com> [MIT] http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/oasis-charter-discuss/200811/msg00017.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/oasis-charter-discuss/200811/msg00018.html Jeff Mischkinsky <jeff.mischkinsky@oracle.com> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/oasis-charter-discuss/200811/msg00016.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/oasis-charter-discuss/200811/msg00004.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/oasis-charter-discuss/200811/msg00003.html Patrick Durusau <patrick@durusau.net> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/oasis-charter-discuss/200811/msg00015.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/oasis-charter-discuss/200811/msg00013.html Farrukh Najmi <farrukh@wellfleetsoftware.com> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/oasis-charter-discuss/200811/msg00010.html Arshad Noor <arshad.noor@strongauth.com> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/oasis-charter-discuss/200811/msg00009.html "Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamilton@acm.org> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/oasis-charter-discuss/200811/msg00008.html "Durand, Jacques R." <JDurand@us.fujitsu.com> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/oasis-charter-discuss/200811/msg00002.html [3] Why the ramped-up effort to form RAND TCs at OASIS? http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/oasis-charter-discuss/200811/msg00014.html Abbie Barbir <abbieb@nortel.com> "RAND is a common mode of operation for Telecom industry." http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/oasis-charter-discuss/200811/msg00022.html Abbie Barbir <abbieb@nortel.com> "Most telecom companies will not participate in a non-RAND TC" "We can have Laision arrangements where comon points can be discussed" "Not every RAND work lead to royalties" http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/oasis-charter-discuss/200811/msg00024.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/oasis-charter-discuss/200811/msg00025.html Brenner, Michael Ralf \(Michael\) <mrbrenner@alcatel-lucent.com> "Many Telco companies (in particular telco vendors) will not participate in non-RAND based SDA..." "... want to attract or not more participation from Telco operators and vendors as members" http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/oasis-charter-discuss/200811/msg00012.html Orit Levin <oritl@microsoft.com> "This TC is about bringing as many as possible telecoms and vendors working in the Telecom area who feel most comfortable with RAND to contribute to the discussion." http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/oasis-charter-discuss/200809/msg00017.html Sabbouh, Marwan" <ms@mitre.org> "As to the [RAND] IPR mode, our employers facilitate our participation in standards committees if RAND is chosen." [4] Dazza (Daniel) Greenwood http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/oasis-charter-discuss/200811/msg00017.html http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/oasis-charter-discuss/200811/msg00018.html ------------- Robin Cover OASIS, Director of Information Services Editor, Cover Pages and XML Daily Newslink Email: robin@oasis-open.org Staff bio: http://www.oasis-open.org/who/staff.php#cover Cover Pages: http://xml.coverpages.org/ Newsletter: http://xml.coverpages.org/newsletterArchive.html Tel: +1 972-296-1783
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]