rights message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Elist Home]
Subject: [rights] tyranny of the majority but no consensus
- From: Bob Glushko <glushko@SIMS.Berkeley.EDU>
- To: rights@lists.oasis-open.org, rights-requirements-help@lists.oasis-open.org,karl.best@oasis-open.org
- Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 10:42:37 -0700
I am going to respond to the note from Mike Godwin below
sent to me and Hari Reddy since I doubt that Hari will.
I too am appalled by the recent votes at the F2F and on yesterday's
conference call. But neither surprised me.
In the days before the F2F, I sent Hari several messages urging restraint
in the face of the mounting pressure from the MPEG constituency in the TC
to ignore the fact that the requirements process hadn't reached consensus
but he didn't reply to me. He didn't reply to me afterwards either when I
suggested he take steps to address the bad feelings caused by the votes
at the F2F. He has steadily lost the impartiality with which he
began as the TC chairman and now predictably sides with the "party
line" as defined by Content Guard and Microsoft, ignoring the fact
that a substantial proportion of the members are opposed to the
"damn the requirements process, full speed ahead" approach they
advocate.
The critical votes were 11 to 10 and 12 to 9 on Thursday and 10 to 8
yesterday. This bare majority clearly demonstrates there is no
consensus for moving forward at this pace -- and also demonstrates that
there is little chance that a specification will be voted out of the TC
for submission to OASIS, since far more than 1/4 of the membership will
oppose it. I am puzzled by the persistence of the MPEG side given
this arithmetic. No specification will be voted out of the TC
without dealing with the full set of requirements submitted to it.
Do the math.
I understand that some of the member companies in this TC have strong
business interests to "get something out" but I also believed
in its charter. The first goal is said to be:
Define the industry standard for a rights language that supports a wide
variety of business models and has an architecture that provides the
flexibility to address the needs of the diverse communities that have
recognized the need for a rights language
It is clear now that any community other than the MPEG is a second-class
citizen whose requirements will be dealt with at some unspecified future
time. It has been disingenuous to call for participation by user
organizations and by people who care about legal and regulatory
issues and then vote to suppress any meaningful impact of their
contributions.
bob glushko
X-Sender:
mnemonic@brillig.panix.com
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 22:34:46 -0400
To: "Reddy, Hari" <Hari.Reddy@CONTENTGUARD.COM>,
"Mike Godwin (E-mail)"
<mnemonic@well.com>
From: Mike Godwin <mnemonic@well.com>
Gentlemen,
I am astonished to hear that the wishes of experts contributing to the
subcommittee were wholly ignored in the vote this afternoon.
It seems clear to me that certain corporate members attended the meeting
with the intention of circumventing the wishes of those who want to see
the first version of the REL accurately express a full range
intellectual-property rights.
I hereby register my protest. I think this was immensely insensitive on
the part of the corporate members, and am considering whether and how to
publicize this subversion of a purportedly "open" standards
process.
This was the last thing I expected, given the representations that had
been made to me about the subcommittee's work. In the time we had
allotted this morning, I believe I demonstrated my willingness to help
the committee reach a first edition of its work in a reasonable amount of
time, and I point out that drawing a line with regard to submissions was
my idea.
I feel an immense sense of betrayal, and I imagine that other members do
too.
--Mike
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"I speak the password primeval .... I give the sign of democracy
...."
--Walt
Whitman
Mike Godwin can be reached by phone at 202-637-9800
His book, CYBER RIGHTS, can be ordered at
http://www.panix.com/~mnemonic
.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Robert J. Glushko, Ph.D.
http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/~glushko
School of Information Management & Systems
102 South Hall
University of California, Berkeley CA 94720-4600
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC