[WSG] NYTimes.com Article: Microsoft Quits a U.N. Standards Group
The article below from NYTimes.com has been sent to you by [EMAIL PROTECTED] This company is really starting to scare me. [EMAIL PROTECTED] /- E-mail Sponsored by Fox Searchlight \ I HEART HUCKABEES - OPENING IN SELECT CITIES OCTOBER 1 From David O. Russell, writer and director of THREE KINGS and FLIRTING WITH DISASTER comes an existential comedy starring Dustin Hoffman, Isabelle Hupert, Jude Law, Jason Schwartzman, Lily Tomlin, Mark Wahlberg and Naomi Watts. Watch the trailer now at: http://www.foxsearchlight.com/huckabees/index_nyt.html \--/ Microsoft Quits a U.N. Standards Group August 24, 2004 By JOHN MARKOFF Microsoft withdrew from a United Nations software standards group for commerce, citing business reasons. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/24/technology/24soft.html?ex=1094355517ei=1en=e6be4aa44b34f223 - Get Home Delivery of The New York Times Newspaper. Imagine reading The New York Times any time anywhere you like! Leisurely catch up on events expand your horizons. Enjoy now for 50% off Home Delivery! Click here: http://homedelivery.nytimes.com/HDS/SubscriptionT1.do?mode=SubscriptionT1ExternalMediaCode=W24AF HOW TO ADVERTISE - For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters or other creative advertising opportunities with The New York Times on the Web, please contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit our online media kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo For general information about NYTimes.com, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ Proud presenters of Web Essentials 04 http://we04.com/ Web standards, accessibility, inspiration, knowledge To be held in Sydney, September 30 and October 1, 2004 See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] NYTimes.com Article: Microsoft Quits a U.N. Standards Group
This company is really starting to scare me. The UN Standards group or Microsoft? If Microsoft, Why? The article also mentioned a couple of well known companies who also had issues with the same standards group (SAP in Germany inparticular) - primarily (it seems) over the groups insistance that Intellectual Property placed into the Open Source arena governed by that body would be indemnified by the contributing company. If I was involved with this group and was required to warrant something I placed into an Open Source project which I then had little control over how it would be used, I'd be pulling out too. Regards, Gary Menzel ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ Proud presenters of Web Essentials 04 http://we04.com/ Web standards, accessibility, inspiration, knowledge To be held in Sydney, September 30 and October 1, 2004 See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] NYTimes.com Article: Microsoft Quits a U.N. Standards Group
Gary, If I was involved with this group and was required to warrant something I placed into an Open Source project which I then had little control over how it would be used, I'd be pulling out too. the issue of IP and standards is a tricky one. There are many standards bodies, the ones we know best are probably the W3C and the ISO. Here is the issue. Due to our current IP laws, (particularly patents) almost every idea under the sun is essentially owned by someone. Obviously standards are based on existing ideas, and so in essence, to have a standard, you are using someone's IP. This is not a theoretical problem. Microsoft have been granted patents that would apply to cascading style sheets. So potentially any browser, or software that uses style sheets may infringe MS's patent. You can see perhaps why I think this is an important issue. Now, if you as a company contribute IP to a standard, in effect you have the standards body over a barrel. In order for anyone to adopt the standard, they need to license your IP. Once a standard is in place, what is to stop you discriminating between different companies, essentially driving some if not all of your competitors out of the space in which the standard operates? So, in order for a standard to work as it should (levelling the playing field for all players), this needs to be addressed. Originally the W3C policy was that all IP had to be offered to anyone using the standard under a Reasonable and non discriminatory license (RAND). This caused an outcry. Suppose MS charged $200K to use CSS. This doesn;t discriminate, as all are charged the same. But whereas Apple or Opera might have no real trouble with that, what about open source projects like Mozilla? Or guys like us (westciv, developers or Style Master)? So the W3C policy now is, royalty free license. You don't lose your IP, you just can't charge for it if it is used in the context of the standard. The issue of what happens if a company changes its mind is interesting, and differs between standards bodies. I won't bore people with the details here, except to say that the license is not enforceable. If I contribute IP to a w3c standard, I can withdraw that even after a standard is published, and the W3C has no way of enforcing the license (this is according to a patent attorney who spoke on this issue at a recent conference I attended) The W3C does have a policy regarding what it will do in these circumstances, bu see here for details http://www.w3.org/IPR/ Sol in essence, there has to be a trade off. You can't be allowed to use IP as a trojan horse to control standards and so a whole industry. At the bottom of this is our really problematic use of Real Property concepts and laws as a basis for IP laws. They are a bad fit for many reasons. Which is not to say we should not have IP laws, but to say that they should be framed in rational ways, for general benefit. At present IP laws are essentially being written by large US companies for their own exclusive benefit. Then countries like australia stupidly adopt them via trojan horses like the recent so called free so called trade so called agreement between the US and Australia, which claim to harmonize IP laws between the US and Australia by *Australia adopting US laws in toto*. Anyway, this is way off topic in some respects, but right on topic in others. john John Allsopp :: westciv :: http://www.westciv.com/ software, courses, resources for a standards based web :: style master blog :: http://westciv.typepad.com/dog_or_higher/ :: WebEssentials Sept 2004 Sydney Australia :: http://www.we04.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ Proud presenters of Web Essentials 04 http://we04.com/ Web standards, accessibility, inspiration, knowledge To be held in Sydney, September 30 and October 1, 2004 See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] NYTimes.com Article: Microsoft Quits a U.N. Standards Group
the issue of IP and standards is a tricky one. There are many standards bodies, the ones we know best are probably the W3C and the ISO. Oh - I can completely understand what you are saying regarding IP, John. Where I was coming from in regard to the article is the following two quotes. Two people who participate in the standards group said that several United States and European companies were concerned about intellectual property rights guidelines in effect within the group. The guidelines would force corporations who contribute technology to indemnify the United Nations against potential challenges involving intellectual property claims and (following straight on from the above quote) In May, at a meeting of the United Nations group, the general counsel for SAP, the German business software firm, announced that his company would suspend all participation in the organization until the intellectual property issues had been settled. My point was this. if Microsoft were the company mentioned in the original post as This company is really starting to scare me. then my question in asking Why? is quite valid in terms of singling out one company who has chosen to withdraw from the group because they are not happy with the arrangements. From that article it appears as though other members of the group are not happy with what is being proposed. In other words, I read the article as being more damning of the way the UN is conducting business rather than being damning of Microsoft. If I have got the wrong impression - then the press has (once again) succeeded in muddying waters that it really has no business playing around in. And if there are problems with a member company of a standards body making donations to that standards body, then how else do they get funding? In any case, it's just my opinion. Regards, Gary Menzel ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ Proud presenters of Web Essentials 04 http://we04.com/ Web standards, accessibility, inspiration, knowledge To be held in Sydney, September 30 and October 1, 2004 See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
