Standards, open standards and Interoperability ETSI, Sophia Antipolis, 26 May 2005 Summing-up discussion Francisco da Silva, Chairman of the ETSI Board 1
“interoperability” - 1 q q . . . means something different to everybody . . . means “interworking” to some people . . . means “compatibility” to some people . . . means “interoperabilty” to some people (. . err what !) q to solve it we need to understand it, we need an agreed definition? 2
“interoperability” - 2 q However, everybody agrees this is a business necessity, and there is: Ø increasing demand for Technical Interoperability Ø need to include it in the standards making process Ø benefits for everyone but completely unorganized Ø still being treated as “ad hoc” issue Ø needs a clear public policy Ø End-users are bewildered (and not just them !) Ø Industry and Governments, in particular through and SDOs, have to take the lead namely to guarantee overall coherence 3
“open” - 1 q. . . means something different to everybody! q. . . means “free” to some people! q open (availability) = Ø from “you can buy a copy” Ø to “its free on the web” q open (IPRs) = Ø from “FRAND conditions apply” Ø to “all IPRs are Royalty-Free” open (process) = Øopportunity for all stake-holders to participate” 4
“open” - 2 q some examples: IDABC: Ø available “Free-of-Charge” & IPRs “Royalty-Free” Ø but applies only for software in the context of e. Government ! W 3 C: Ø available “Free-of-Charge” & IPRs “Royalty-Free”, Ø web culture and FRAND-IPR polices don’t work well together, Ø have a FRAND exception process but never used it (. . and maybe never will ? ) Ø “free” is not the problem – its the other conditions ! classic SDO: Ø available “Free-of-Charge” or “small-fee”, Ø IPRs on FRAND conditions. 5
“open source” q . . . is about implementation/business models not about specification / standardization q. . . so its IPR perspective is one of a business model, i. e. a different perspective from the one of the standardization activity q 6
“open standards (process)” q everybody agrees that we need open standards as a condition for successful interoperability q but this is not sufficient, more is needed. . q there is much agreement on the overall concepts but differences arise when we start considering the IPR issues 7
so what needs to be done q need to refine concepts such as: Ø“Interworking” Ø “Interoperability” Ø “open standard” Ø “open source” Ø “free” – re. SDO processes Ø “free” – re. implicit implications (IPRs) q Is openness of standards: IPR policy dependent, or is it a matter of business models ? q software, business & standards people need to start using the same language/concepts q IPR policy: can one size fit all (no way? ) q What needs to be done to solve the Operators problem when the IPR license fees are too high – review FRAND levels in SDO IPR policies ? 8
what next q need to increase consensus building across all stakeholders q need to agree on priorities q need to accept that there maybe more than one conclusion to choose from q ETSI is willing to be a driver in the debate and to provide a place to talk. . and the infrastructure necessary q ETSI will organise another hearing on [21 October 2005] Please help us to help you ! 9
Скачать презентацию Standards open standards and Interoperability ETSI Sophia Antipolis
fdacef4036b9e0b423dd6481196d6984.ppt