-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Open Standards: The Devil Lives in the Details
,----[ Quote ]
| I am publishing this post almost three months later than my initial plan,
| mainly because the past three months were very complicated ones.
|
| There are many “open standards” definitions, and this great amount of
| interpretations or views about the subject, allowed distortions to make
| possible that almost anything on IT market could be classified as an “Open
| Standard” by marketing departments.
|
| For me, and certainly for many of you, an open standard must meet two basic
| requirements:
|
| 1. Have been developed and is maintained through an open and transparent
| process.
|
| 2. Have open licensing.
|
| [...]
|
| The second one, is the so-called RAND (Ressonable And non-discriminatory).
| One don’t need to “force the brain” to realize that this model is quite
| complicated to use in practice, because what is reasonable to me may not be
| for you and to believe that something can be non-discriminatory on our
| current world is a little bit difficult task, OK ? (if someone disagree with
| that, please explain me how a Cuban company may RAND license technology from
| an USA company ?). ISO accepts RAND licensing and OpenXML can be cited as an
| example of this type of licensing (indeed, if there is anyone encouraged to
| answer the previous question, please improve the response explaining me how
| Cuba - an ISO member - can get a RAND license to develop an OpenXML based
| software… ISO is really a complicated institution.). In other words, for the
| USA economic reality, a technology license that costs U.S. $ 500 K may be
| reasonable, but I can’t assure that this resonable in Brazil (same on other
| countries)… a value like that would be considered “reasonable”? Maybe the
| participation on international standardization process to latter offer RAND
| licensing of its IPR may be a good deal.
|
| [...]
|
| As you can see, an specification called as an “open standard” can be licensed
| by one of the three models mentioned above or be the victim of the fourth
| type and I write this text to warn everyone about this problem.
`----
http://homembit.com/2008/11/open-standards-the-devil-lives-in-the-details.html
Recent:
Wigital: Interoperability - Open Source, Sun Java, Novell Linux and Microsoft
,----[ Quote ]
| Microsoft patenst in these protocols will be made available on RAND terms at
| very low royalty rates Covenant not to sue open source developers for
| development and non-commercial distribution of implementations of these Open
| Protocols.
`----
http://www.digitalmajority.org/forum/t-67212/wigital:interoperability-open-source-sun-java-novell-linux-and-microsoft
2008-04-02 Royalty Free versus Reasonable and Non Discriminatory Licensing
,----[ Quote ]
| Now, here an example of a RAND (Reasonable And Non Discriminatory) licensing
| model, this one has been made by Cisco about VRRP :
|
| Cisco is the owner of US patent No. 5 473 599, relating to the subject matter
| of "Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol for IPv6
| <draft-ietf-vrrp-ipv6-spec-04.txt>. If technology in this document is
| included in a standard adopted by IETF and any claims of this or any other
| Cisco patent are necessary for practicing the standard, any party will be
| able to obtain a license from Cisco to use any such patent claims under
| reasonable, non-discriminatory terms to implement and fully comply with the
| standard.
|
| First you need to contact Cisco to have a license but the terms are
| unknown. "Non-discriminatory" is vague and could be an issue for any free
| software implementation.
`----
http://www.foo.be/cgi-bin/wiki.pl/2008-04-02_Royalty_Free_versus_Reasonable_and_Non_Discriminatory_Licensing
Rambus Court: “Price Raising Deception” Not Competitive Harm
,----[ Quote ]
| By the time Rambus announced its patents and began demanding royalties (and
| filing patent infringement suits against companies that refused to pay
| royalties), Rambus had achieved a technical “lock-in” that made it difficult
| for the memory chip industry to move to a different technology. Rambus’s
| lock-in allowed it to obtain a 90% market-share, and demand supracompetitive
| royalties from companies that were producing JEDEC-compliant memory devices.
| Rambus has earned several billion dollars in licensing fees to date, and by
| some estimates its total royalties are could reach as high as $11 billion.
`----
http://www.masslawblog.com/?p=179
Related:
Nokia to W3C: Ogg is proprietary, we need DRM on the Web
,----[ Quote ]
| But remember, that's not what Nokia is objecting to: they are arguing that
| Ogg is proprietary (it isn't) and that DRM should be part of a Web standard
| (it shouldn't).
`----
http://www.boingboing.net/2007/12/09/nokia-to-w3c-ogg-is.html
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAkk50uAACgkQU4xAY3RXLo7XawCfXed9BVIpkP8iwOvNohrh2m2w
z9oAnii+qXytqzWq5aiKZJsrFouZXgAp
=dSKr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
