Open standard

Last updated

An open standard is a standard that is openly accessible and usable by anyone. It is also a common prerequisite that open standards use an open license that provides for extensibility. Typically, anybody can participate in their development due to their inherently open nature. There is no single definition, and interpretations vary with usage. Examples of open standards include the GSM, 4G, and 5G standards that allow most modern mobile phones to work world-wide.

Contents

Definitions

The terms open and standard have a wide range of meanings associated with their usage. There are a number of definitions of open standards which emphasize different aspects of openness, including the openness of the resulting specification, the openness of the drafting process, and the ownership of rights in the standard. The term "standard" is sometimes restricted to technologies approved by formalized committees that are open to participation by all interested parties and operate on a consensus basis.

The definitions of the term open standard used by academics, the European Union, and some of its member governments or parliaments such as Denmark, France, and Spain preclude open standards requiring fees for use, as do the New Zealand, South African and the Venezuelan governments. On the standard organisation side, the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) ensures that its specifications can be implemented on a royalty-free basis.

Many definitions of the term standard permit patent holders to impose "reasonable and non-discriminatory licensing" royalty fees and other licensing terms on implementers or users of the standard. For example, the rules for standards published by the major internationally recognized standards bodies such as the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), International Organization for Standardization (ISO), International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), and ITU-T permit their standards to contain specifications whose implementation will require payment of patent licensing fees. Among these organizations, only the IETF and ITU-T explicitly refer to their standards as "open standards", while the others refer only to producing "standards". The IETF and ITU-T use definitions of "open standard" that allow "reasonable and non-discriminatory" patent licensing fee requirements.

There are those in the open-source software community who hold that an "open standard" is only open if it can be freely adopted, implemented and extended. [1] While open standards or architectures are considered non-proprietary in the sense that the standard is either unowned or owned by a collective body, it can still be publicly shared and not tightly guarded. [2] The typical example of "open source" that has become a standard is the personal computer originated by IBM and now referred to as Wintel, the combination of the Microsoft operating system and Intel microprocessor. [3] There are three others that are most widely accepted as "open" which include the GSM phones (adopted as a government standard), Open Group which promotes UNIX, and the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) which created the first standards of SMTP and TCP/IP. Buyers tend to prefer open standards which they believe offer them cheaper products and more choice for access due to network effects and increased competition between vendors. [4]

Open standards which specify formats are sometimes referred to as open formats.

Many specifications that are sometimes referred to as standards are proprietary, and only available (if they can be obtained at all) under restrictive contract terms from the organization that owns the copyright on the specification. As such these specifications are not considered to be fully open. Joel West has argued that "open" standards are not black and white but have many different levels of "openness". [5] A more open standard tends to occur when the knowledge of the technology becomes dispersed enough that competition is increased and others are able to start copying the technology as they implement it. This occurred with the Wintel architecture as others were able to start imitating the software. [3] Less open standards exist when a particular firm has much power (not ownership) over the standard, which can occur when a firm's platform "wins" in standard setting or the market makes one platform most popular. [6]

Specific definitions of an open standard

Made by standardization bodies

Joint IEEE, ISOC, W3C, IETF and IAB Definition

On August 12, 2012, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), Internet Society (ISOC), World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and Internet Architecture Board (IAB), jointly affirmed a set of principles which have contributed to the exponential growth of the Internet and related technologies. The "OpenStand Principles" define open standards and establish the building blocks for innovation. [7] [8] Standards developed using the OpenStand principles are developed through an open, participatory process, support interoperability, foster global competition, are voluntarily adopted on a global level and serve as building blocks for products and services targeted to meet the needs of markets and consumers. This drives innovation which, in turn, contributes to the creation of new markets and the growth and expansion of existing markets.

There are five, key OpenStand Principles, as outlined below:

1. Cooperation Respectful cooperation between standards organizations, whereby each respects the autonomy, integrity, processes, and intellectual property rules of the others.

2. Adherence to Principles – Adherence to the five fundamental principles of standards development, namely

  • Due process: Decisions are made with equity and fairness among participants. No one party dominates or guides standards development. Standards processes are transparent and opportunities exist to appeal decisions. Processes for periodic standards review and updating are well defined.
  • Broad consensus: Processes allow for all views to be considered and addressed, such that agreement can be found across a range of interests.
  • Transparency: Standards organizations provide advance public notice of proposed standards development activities, the scope of work to be undertaken, and conditions for participation. Easily accessible records of decisions and the materials used in reaching those decisions are provided. Public comment periods are provided before final standards approval and adoption.
  • Balance: Standards activities are not exclusively dominated by any particular person, company or interest group.
  • Openness: Standards processes are open to all interested and informed parties.

3. Collective Empowerment Commitment by affirming standards organizations and their participants to collective empowerment by striving for standards that:

  • are chosen and defined based on technical merit, as judged by the contributed expertise of each participant;
  • provide global interoperability, scalability, stability, and resiliency;
  • enable global competition;
  • serve as building blocks for further innovation; and
  • contribute to the creation of global communities, benefiting humanity.

4. Availability Standards specifications are made accessible to all for implementation and deployment. Affirming standards organizations have defined procedures to develop specifications that can be implemented under fair terms. Given market diversity, fair terms may vary from royalty-free to fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms (FRAND).

5. Voluntary Adoption Standards are voluntarily adopted and success is determined by the market.

[9]

ITU-T definition

The ITU-T is a standards development organization (SDO) that is one of the three sectors of the International Telecommunication Union (a specialized agency of the United Nations). The ITU-T has a Telecommunication Standardization Bureau director's Ad Hoc group on IPR that produced the following definition in March 2005, which the ITU-T as a whole has endorsed for its purposes since November 2005: [10]

The ITU-T has a long history of open standards development. However, recently some different external sources have attempted to define the term "Open Standard" in a variety of different ways. In order to avoid confusion, the ITU-T uses for its purpose the term "Open Standards" per the following definition:
"Open Standards" are standards made available to the general public and are developed (or approved) and maintained via a collaborative and consensus driven process. "Open Standards" facilitate interoperability and data exchange among different products or services and are intended for widespread adoption.
Other elements of "Open Standards" include, but are not limited to:
  • Collaborative process – voluntary and market driven development (or approval) following a transparent consensus driven process that is reasonably open to all interested parties.
  • Reasonably balanced – ensures that the process is not dominated by any one interest group.
  • Due process – includes consideration of and response to comments by interested parties.
  • Intellectual property rights (IPRs) – IPRs essential to implement the standard to be licensed to all applicants on a worldwide, non-discriminatory basis, either (1) for free and under other reasonable terms and conditions or (2) on reasonable terms and conditions (which may include monetary compensation). Negotiations are left to the parties concerned and are performed outside the SDO.
  • Quality and level of detail – sufficient to permit the development of a variety of competing implementations of interoperable products or services. Standardized interfaces are not hidden, or controlled other than by the SDO promulgating the standard.
  • Publicly available – easily available for implementation and use, at a reasonable price. Publication of the text of a standard by others is permitted only with the prior approval of the SDO.
  • On-going support – maintained and supported over a long period of time.

The ITU-T, ITU-R, ISO, and IEC have harmonized on a common patent policy [11] under the banner of the WSC. However, the ITU-T definition should not necessarily be considered also applicable in ITU-R, ISO and IEC contexts, since the Common Patent Policy [12] does not make any reference to "open standards" but rather only to "standards."

IETF definition

In section 7 of its RFC 2026, the IETF classifies specifications that have been developed in a manner similar to that of the IETF itself as being "open standards," and lists the standards produced by ANSI, ISO, IEEE, and ITU-T as examples. As the IETF standardization processes and IPR policies have the characteristics listed above by ITU-T, the IETF standards fulfill the ITU-T definition of "open standards."

However, the IETF has not adopted a specific definition of "open standard"; both RFC 2026 and the IETF's mission statement (RFC 3935) talks about "open process," but RFC 2026 does not define "open standard" except for the purpose of defining what documents IETF standards can link to.

RFC 2026 belongs to a set of RFCs collectively known as BCP 9 (Best Common Practice, an IETF policy). [13] RFC 2026 was later updated by BCP 78 and 79 (among others). As of 2011 BCP 78 is RFC 5378 (Rights Contributors Provide to the IETF Trust), [14] and BCP 79 consists of RFC 3979 (Intellectual Property Rights in IETF Technology) and a clarification in RFC 4879. [15] The changes are intended to be compatible with the "Simplified BSD License" as stated in the IETF Trust Legal Provisions and Copyright FAQ based on RFC 5377. [16]

In August 2012, the IETF combined with the W3C and IEEE to launch OpenStand [17] and to publish The Modern Paradigm for Standards. This captures "the effective and efficient standardization processes that have made the Internet and Web the premiere platforms for innovation and borderless commerce". The declaration is then published in the form of RFC 6852 in January 2013.

By legislative or governmental bodies

European Interoperability Framework for Pan-European eGovernment Services

The European Union defined the term for use within its European Interoperability Framework for Pan-European eGovernment Services, Version 1.0 [18] although it does not claim to be a universal definition for all European Union use and documentation.

To reach interoperability in the context of pan-European eGovernment services, guidance needs to focus on open standards.

The word "open" is here meant in the sense of fulfilling the following requirements:

  • The standard is adopted and will be maintained by a not-for-profit organization, and its ongoing development occurs on the basis of an open decision-making procedure available to all interested parties (consensus or majority decision etc.).
  • The standard has been published and the standard specification document is available either freely or at a nominal charge. It must be permissible to all to copy, distribute and use it for no fee or at a nominal fee.
  • The intellectual property – i.e. patents possibly present – of (parts of) the standard is made irrevocably available on a royalty-free basis.
  • There are no constraints on the re-use of the standard [19]

Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium definition

The Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC) defines open standard as the following:

Specifications for hardware and/or software that are publicly available implying that multiple vendors can compete directly based on the features and performance of their products. It also implies that the existing open system can be removed and replaced with that of another vendor with minimal effort and without major interruption. [20]

Danish government definition

The Danish government has attempted to make a definition of open standards, [21] which also is used in pan-European software development projects. It states:

  • An open standard is accessible to everyone free of charge (i.e. there is no discrimination between users, and no payment or other considerations are required as a condition of use of the standard)
  • An open standard of necessity remains accessible and free of charge (i.e. owners renounce their options, if indeed such exist, to limit access to the standard at a later date, for example, by committing themselves to openness during the remainder of a possible patent's life)
  • An open standard is accessible free of charge and documented in all its details (i.e. all aspects of the standard are transparent and documented, and both access to and use of the documentation is free)

French law definition

The French Parliament approved a definition of "open standard" in its "Law for Confidence in the Digital Economy." [22] The definition is (Article 4):

  • By open standard is understood any communication, interconnection or interchange protocol, and any interoperable data format whose specifications are public and without any restriction in their access or implementation.

Indian Government Definition

A clear royalty-free stance and far reaching requirements case is the one for India's Government [23]

4.1 Mandatory Characteristics An Identified Standard will qualify as an "Open Standard", if it meets the following criteria:

  • 4.1.1 Specification document of the Identified Standard shall be available with or without a nominal fee.
  • 4.1.2 The Patent claims necessary to implement the Identified Standard shall be made available on a Royalty-Free basis for the lifetime of the Standard.
  • 4.1.3 Identified Standard shall be adopted and maintained by a not-for-profit organization, wherein all stakeholders can opt to participate in a transparent, collaborative and consensual manner.
  • 4.1.4 Identified Standard shall be recursively open as far as possible.
  • 4.1.5 Identified Standard shall have technology-neutral specification.
  • 4.1.6 Identified Standard shall be capable of localization support, where applicable, for all Indian official Languages for all applicable domains.

Italian Law definition

Italy has a general rule for the entire public sector dealing with Open Standards, although concentrating on data formats, in Art. 68 of the Code of the Digital Administration (Codice dell'Amministrazione Digitale) [24]

[applications must] allow representation of data under different formats, at least one being an open data format.

[...]

[it is defined] an open data format, a data format which is made public, is thoroughly documented and neutral with regard to the technological tools needed to peruse the same data.

New Zealand official interoperability framework definition

The E-Government Interoperability Framework (e-GIF) [25] defines open standard as royalty-free according to the following text:

While a universally agreed definition of "open standards" is unlikely to be resolved in the near future, the e-GIF accepts that a definition of "open standards" needs to recognise a continuum that ranges from closed to open, and encompasses varying degrees of "openness." To guide readers in this respect, the e-GIF endorses "open standards" that exhibit the following properties:

  • Be accessible to everyone free of charge: no discrimination between users, and no payment or other considerations should be required as a condition to use the standard.
  • Remain accessible to everyone free of charge: owners should renounce their options, if any, to limit access to the standard at a later date.
  • Be documented in all its details: all aspects of the standard should be transparent and documented, and both access to and use of the documentation should be free.

The e-GIF performs the same function in e-government as the Road Code does on the highways. Driving would be excessively costly, inefficient, and ineffective if road rules had to be agreed each time one vehicle encountered another.

Portuguese law definition

The Portuguese Open Standards Law, [26] adopted in 2011, demands the use of Open Standards, and is applicable to sovereign entities, central public administration services (including decentralized services and public institutes), regional public administration services and the public sector. In it, Open Standards are defined thus:

a) Its adoption is fruit off an open decision process accessible to all interested parties;

b) The specifications document must have been freely published, allowing its copy, distribution and use without restrictions;

c) The specifications document cannot cover undocumented actions of processes;

d) The applicable intellectual property rights, including patents, have been made available in a full, irrevocable and irreversible way to the Portuguese State;

e) There are no restrictions to its implementation.

Spanish law definition

A Law passed by the Spanish Parliament [27] requires that all electronic services provided by the Spanish public administration must be based on open standards. It defines an open standard as royalty-free, according to the following definition (ANEXO Definiciones k):

An open standard fulfills the following conditions:

  • it is public, and its use is available on a free [gratis] basis, or at a cost that does not imply a difficulty for the user.
  • its use is not subject to the payment of any intellectual [copyright] or industrial [patents and trademarks] property right.

South African Government definition

The South African Government approved a definition in the "Minimum Interoperability Operating Standards Handbook" (MIOS). [28]

For the purposes of the MIOS, a standard shall be considered open if it meets all of these criteria. There are standards which we are obliged to adopt for pragmatic reasons which do not necessarily fully conform to being open in all respects. In such cases, where an open standard does not yet exist, the degree of openness will be taken into account when selecting an appropriate standard:

  1. it should be maintained by a non-commercial organization
  2. participation in the ongoing development work is based on decision-making processes that are open to all interested parties.
  3. open access: all may access committee documents, drafts and completed standards free of cost or for a negligible fee.
  4. It must be possible for everyone to copy, distribute and use the standard free of cost.
  5. The intellectual rights required to implement the standard (e.g.essential patent claims) are irrevocably available, without any royalties attached.
  6. There are no reservations regarding reuse of the standard.
  7. There are multiple implementations of the standard.

UK government definition

The UK government's definition of open standards applies to software interoperability, data and document formats. The criteria for open standards are published in the "Open Standards Principles" policy paper and are as follows. [29]

  1. Collaboration – the standard is maintained through a collaborative decision-making process that is consensus based and independent of any individual supplier. Involvement in the development and maintenance of the standard is accessible to all interested parties.
  2. Transparency – the decision-making process is transparent, and a publicly accessible review by subject matter experts is part of the process.
  3. Due process – the standard is adopted by a specification or standardisation organisation, or a forum or consortium with a feedback and ratification process to ensure quality.
  4. Fair access – the standard is well documented, publicly available and free to use.
  5. Mature – completely developed, unless they are in the context of creating innovative solutions.
  6. Independent of platform, application and vendor – supported by the market with several implementations.
  7. Rights – rights essential to implementation of the standard, and for interfacing with other implementations which have adopted that same standard, are licensed on a royalty-free basis that is compatible with both open source and proprietary licensed solutions. These rights should be irrevocable unless there is a breach of licence conditions.

The Cabinet Office in the UK recommends that government departments specify requirements using open standards when undertaking procurement exercises in order to promote interoperability and re-use, and avoid technological lock-in. [30]

Venezuelan law definition

The Venezuelan Government approved a "free software and open standards law." [31] The decree includes the requirement that the Venezuelan public sector must use free software based on open standards, and includes a definition of open standard:

Article 2: for the purposes of this Decree, it shall be understood as

k) Open standards: technical specifications, published and controlled by an organization in charge of their development, that have been accepted by the industry, available to everybody for their implementation in free software or other [type of software], promoting competitivity, interoperability and flexibility.

By recognized persons

Bruce Perens' definition

One of the most popular definitions of the term "open standard", as measured by Google ranking, is the one developed by Bruce Perens. [32] His definition lists a set of principles that he believes must be met by an open standard: [33]

  1. Availability: Open Standards are available for all to read and implement.
  2. Maximize End-User Choice: Open Standards create a fair, competitive market for implementations of the standard. They do not lock the customer into a particular vendor or group.
  3. No Royalty: Open Standards are free for all to implement, with no royalty or fee. Certification of compliance by the standards organization may involve a fee.
  4. No Discrimination: Open Standards and the organizations that administer them do not favor one implementor over another for any reason other than the technical standards compliance of a vendor's implementation. Certification organizations must provide a path for low and zero-cost implementations to be validated, but may also provide enhanced certification services.
  5. Extension or Subset: Implementations of Open Standards may be extended, or offered in subset form. However, certification organizations may decline to certify subset implementations, and may place requirements upon extensions (see Predatory Practices).
  6. Predatory Practices: Open Standards may employ license terms that protect against subversion of the standard by embrace-and-extend tactics. The licenses attached to the standard may require the publication of reference information for extensions, and a license for all others to create, distribute, and sell software that is compatible with the extensions. An Open Standard may not otherwise prohibit extensions.

Bruce Perens goes on to explain further the points in the standard in practice. With regard to availability, he states that "any software project should be able to afford a copy without undue hardship. The cost should not far exceed the cost of a college textbook". [33]

Ken Krechmer's definition

Ken Krechmer [34] identifies ten "rights":

  1. Open Meeting
  2. Consensus
  3. Due Process
  4. Open IPR
  5. One World
  6. Open Change
  7. Open Documents
  8. Open Interface
  9. Open Use
  10. On-going Support

By companies

Microsoft's definition

Vijay Kapoor, national technology officer, Microsoft, defines what open standards are as follows: [35]

Let's look at what an open standard means: 'open' refers to it being royalty-free, while 'standard' means a technology approved by formalized committees that are open to participation by all interested parties and operate on a consensus basis. An open standard is publicly available, and developed, approved and maintained via a collaborative and consensus driven process.

Overall, Microsoft's relationship to open standards was, at best, mixed. While Microsoft participated in the most significant standard-setting organizations that establish open standards, it was often seen as oppositional to their adoption. [36]

By non-profit organizations

Open Source Initiative's definition

The Open Source Initiative defines the requirements and criteria for open standards as follows: [37]

The Requirement

An "open standard" must not prohibit conforming implementations in open source software.

The Criteria

To comply with the Open Standards Requirement, an "open standard" must satisfy the following criteria. If an "open standard" does not meet these criteria, it will be discriminating against open source developers.

  1. No Intentional Secrets: The standard MUST NOT withhold any detail necessary for interoperable implementation. As flaws are inevitable, the standard MUST define a process for fixing flaws identified during implementation and interoperability testing and to incorporate said changes into a revised version or superseding version of the standard to be released under terms that do not violate the OSR.
  2. Availability: The standard MUST be freely and publicly available (e.g., from a stable web site) under royalty-free terms at reasonable and non-discriminatory cost.
  3. Patents: All patents essential to implementation of the standard MUST:
    • be licensed under royalty-free terms for unrestricted use, or
    • be covered by a promise of non-assertion when practiced by open source software
  4. No Agreements: There MUST NOT be any requirement for execution of a license agreement, NDA, grant, click-through, or any other form of paperwork to deploy conforming implementations of the standard.
  5. No OSR-Incompatible Dependencies: Implementation of the standard MUST NOT require any other technology that fails to meet the criteria of this Requirement.

World Wide Web Consortium's definition

As a provider of Web technology ICT Standards, notably XML, http, HTML, CSS and WAI, the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) follows a process that promotes the development of quality standards. [38]

Looking at the result, the spec alone, up for adoption, is not enough. The participative/inclusive process leading to a particular design, and the supporting resources available with it should be accounted when we talk about Open Standards:

  • transparency (due process is public, and all technical discussions, meeting minutes, are archived and referencable in decision making)
  • relevance (new standardization is started upon due analysis of the market needs, including requirements phase, e.g. accessibility, multi-linguism)
  • openness (anybody can participate, and everybody does: industry, individual, public, government bodies, academia, on a worldwide scale)
  • impartiality and consensus (guaranteed fairness by the process and the neutral hosting of the W3C organization, with equal weight for each participant)
  • availability (free access to the standard text, both during development, at final stage, and for translations, and assurance that core Web and Internet technologies can be implemented Royalty-Free)
  • maintenance (ongoing process for testing, errata, revision, permanent access, validation, etc.)

In August 2012, the W3C combined with the IETF and IEEE to launch OpenStand [17] and to publish The Modern Paradigm for Standards. This captures "the effective and efficient standardization processes that have made the Internet and Web the premiere platforms for innovation and borderless commerce".

Digital Standards Organization definition

The Digital Standards Organization (DIGISTAN) states that "an open standard must be aimed at creating unrestricted competition between vendors and unrestricted choice for users." [39] Its brief definition of "open standard" (or "free and open standard") is "a published specification that is immune to vendor capture at all stages in its life-cycle." Its more complete definition as follows:

  • "The standard is adopted and will be maintained by a not-for-profit organization, and its ongoing development occurs on the basis of an open decision-making procedure available to all interested parties.
  • The standard has been published and the standard specification document is available freely. It must be permissible to all to copy, distribute, and use it freely.
  • The patents possibly present on (parts of) the standard are made irrevocably available on a royalty-free basis.
  • There are no constraints on the re-use of the standard.

A key defining property is that an open standard is immune to vendor capture at all stages in its life-cycle. Immunity from vendor capture makes it possible to improve upon, trust, and extend an open standard over time." [40]

This definition is based on the EU's EIF v1 definition of "open standard," but with changes to address what it terms as "vendor capture." They believe that "Many groups and individuals have provided definitions for 'open standard' that reflect their economic interests in the standards process. We see that the fundamental conflict is between vendors who seek to capture markets and raise costs, and the market at large, which seeks freedom and lower costs... Vendors work hard to turn open standards into franchise standards. They work to change the statutory language so they can cloak franchise standards in the sheep's clothing of 'open standard.' A robust definition of "free and open standard" must thus take into account the direct economic conflict between vendors and the market at large." [39]

Free Software Foundation Europe's definition

The Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) uses a definition which is based on the European Interoperability Framework v.1, and was extended after consultation with industry and community stakeholders. [41] FSFE's standard has been adopted by groups such as the SELF EU Project, the 2008 Geneva Declaration on Standards and the Future of the Internet, and international Document Freedom Day teams.

According to this definition an Open Standard is a format or protocol that is:

  1. Subject to full public assessment and use without constraints in a manner equally available to all parties;
  2. Without any components or extensions that have dependencies on formats or protocols that do not meet the definition of an Open Standard themselves;
  3. Free from legal or technical clauses that limit its utilisation by any party or in any business model;
  4. Managed and further developed independently of any single vendor in a process open to the equal participation of competitors and third parties;
  5. Available in multiple complete implementations by competing vendors, or as a complete implementation equally available to all parties.

FFII's definition

The Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure's definition is said[ by whom? ] to coincide with the definition issued in the European Interoperability Framework released in 2004.

A specification that is public, the standard is inclusive and it has been developed and is maintained in an open standardization process, everybody can implement it without any restriction, neither payment, to license the IPR (granted to everybody for free and without any condition). This is the minimum license terms asked by standardization bodies as W3C. Of course, all the other bodies accept open standards. But specification itself could cost a fair amount of money (i.e. 100–400 Eur per copy as in ISO because copyright and publication of the document itself). [42]

Comparison of definitions

PublisherTime of pub­licationAvaila­bilityUsage rightsProcessComplete­ness
Free of chargeFRAND termsRoyalty-free, irrevocablyFRAND termsOpen participationOpen viewingNeeds multiple vendor
implementations or open
reference for maturity
Joint IEEE, ISOC, W3C, IETF, IAB2012-08-12NoNoNoRed herringNoNoNo
ITU-T2005-03NoYesNoYesNoNoNo
Pan-European eGovernment20040 or nominal—Yes—Yes—No
Danish government2004Yes—Unclear—NoNoNo
French law2004Implied—Implied—NoNoNo
Indian government20140 or nominal—Yes—NoNoNo
Italian law2005-03-07NoNoNoNoNoNoNo
New Zealand e-GIF2007-06-22Yes—Unclear—NoNoNo
Portuguese law2011-06-21Yes—Yes—Yes—No
South African government2007Yes—Yes—Yes—Yes
Spanish law2007-06-22NoNo0 or low—NoNoNo
UK government20120 or low—Yes—Yes—Yes
Venezuelan law2004-12-23NoNoImplied—NoNoNo
Bruce Perensbefore 2002PreferredImpliedYes—NoNoNo
Microsoftc. 2006NoNoYes—Yes—No
Open Source Initiative2006–09NoYesPartialNoYes—No
Ken Krechmer2005-01NoYesYes—Yes—No
W3C2005–09Yes—Yes—Yes—No
DIGISTANc. 2008Yes—Yes—Yes—No
FSFE2001YesNoImplied—Yes—Yes
FFIIbefore 2004NoNoYes—NoNoNo

Examples of open standards

Note that because the various definitions of "open standard" differ in their requirements, the standards listed below may not be open by every definition.

System

Hardware

File formats

Protocols

Programming languages

Other

Data2Dome logo Data2Dome logo.jpg
Data2Dome logo

Examples of associations

Patents

In 2002 and 2003 the controversy about using reasonable and non-discriminatory (RAND) licensing for the use of patented technology in web standards increased. Bruce Perens, important associations as FSF or FFII and others have argued that the use of patents restricts who can implement a standard to those able or willing to pay for the use of the patented technology. The requirement to pay some small amount per user, is often an insurmountable problem for free/open source software implementations which can be redistributed by anyone. Royalty-free (RF) licensing is generally the only possible license for free/open source software implementations. Version 3 of the GNU General Public License includes a section that enjoins anyone who distributes a program released under the GPL from enforcing patents on subsequent users of the software or derivative works.

One result of this controversy was that many governments (including the Danish, French and Spanish governments singly and the EU collectively) specifically affirmed that "open standards" required royalty-free licenses. Some standards organizations, such as the W3C, modified their processes to essentially only permit royalty-free licensing.

Patents for software, formulas and algorithms are currently enforceable in the US but not in the EU. The European Patent Convention expressly prohibits algorithms, business methods and software from being covered by patents. [51] The US has only allowed them since 1989 and there has been growing controversy in recent years as to either the benefit or feasibility.

A standards body and its associated processes cannot force a patent holder to give up its right to charge license fees, especially if the company concerned is not a member of the standards body and unconstrained by any rules that were set during the standards development process. In fact, this element discourages some standards bodies from adopting an "open" approach, fearing that they will lose out if their members are more constrained than non-members. Few bodies will carry out (or require their members to carry out) a full patent search. Ultimately, the only sanctions a standards body can apply on a non-member when patent licensing is demanded is to cancel the standard, try to rework around it, or work to invalidate the patent. Standards bodies such as W3C and OASIS require[ citation needed ] that the use of required patents be granted under a royalty-free license as a condition for joining the body or a particular working group, and this is generally considered enforceable.[ citation needed ]

Examples of patent claims brought against standards previously thought to be open include JPEG and the Rambus case over DDR SDRAM. The H.264 video codec is an example of a standards organization producing a standard that has known, non-royalty-free required patents.

Often the scope of the standard itself determines how likely it is that a firm will be able to use a standard as patent-like protection. Richard Langlois argues that standards with a wide scope may offer a firm some level of protection from competitors but it is likely that Schumpeterian creative destruction will ultimately leave the firm open to being "invented around" regardless of the standard a firm may benefit from. [2]

Quotes

[...] The tsunami that devastated South Eastern Asian countries and the north-eastern parts of Africa, is perhaps the most graphic, albeit unfortunate, demonstration of the need for global collaboration, and open ICT standards. The incalculable loss of life and damage to property was exacerbated by the fact that responding agencies and non-governmental groups were unable to share information vital to the rescue effort. Each was using different data and document formats. Relief was slowed, and coordination complicated. [...]

— Mosibudi Mangena, Opening address of SATNAC 2005

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">HTML</span> HyperText Markup Language

Hypertext Markup Language (HTML) is the standard markup language for documents designed to be displayed in a web browser. It defines the content and structure of web content. It is often assisted by technologies such as Cascading Style Sheets (CSS) and scripting languages such as JavaScript, a programming language.

In computer network engineering, an Internet Standard is a normative specification of a technology or methodology applicable to the Internet. Internet Standards are created and published by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). They allow interoperation of hardware and software from different sources which allows internets to function. As the Internet became global, Internet Standards became the lingua franca of worldwide communications.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">OSI model</span> Model of communication of seven abstraction layers

The Open Systems Interconnection (OSI) model is a reference model from the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) that "provides a common basis for the coordination of standards development for the purpose of systems interconnection." In the OSI reference model, the communications between systems are split into seven different abstraction layers: Physical, Data Link, Network, Transport, Session, Presentation, and Application.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">XML</span> Markup language by the W3C for encoding of data

Extensible Markup Language (XML) is a markup language and file format for storing, transmitting, and reconstructing arbitrary data. It defines a set of rules for encoding documents in a format that is both human-readable and machine-readable. The World Wide Web Consortium's XML 1.0 Specification of 1998 and several other related specifications—all of them free open standards—define XML.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Interoperability</span> Ability of systems to work with each other

Interoperability is a characteristic of a product or system to work with other products or systems. While the term was initially defined for information technology or systems engineering services to allow for information exchange, a broader definition takes into account social, political, and organizational factors that impact system-to-system performance.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Topic map</span> Knowledge organization system

A topic map is a standard for the representation and interchange of knowledge, with an emphasis on the findability of information. Topic maps were originally developed in the late 1990s as a way to represent back-of-the-book index structures so that multiple indexes from different sources could be merged. However, the developers quickly realized that with a little additional generalization, they could create a meta-model with potentially far wider application. The ISO/IEC standard is formally known as ISO/IEC 13250:2003.

The Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards is a nonprofit consortium that works on the development, convergence, and adoption of projects - both open standards and open source - for Computer security, blockchain, Internet of things (IoT), emergency management, cloud computing, legal data exchange, energy, content technologies, and other areas.

X3D is a set of royalty-free ISO/IEC standards for declaratively representing 3D computer graphics. X3D includes multiple graphics file formats, programming-language API definitions, and run-time specifications for both delivery and integration of interactive network-capable 3D data. X3D version 4.0 has been approved by Web3D Consortium, and is under final review by ISO/IEC as a revised International Standard (IS).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Advanced Video Coding</span> Most widely used standard for video compression

Advanced Video Coding (AVC), also referred to as H.264 or MPEG-4 Part 10, is a video compression standard based on block-oriented, motion-compensated coding. It is by far the most commonly used format for the recording, compression, and distribution of video content, used by 91% of video industry developers as of September 2019. It supports a maximum resolution of 8K UHD.

An open file format is a file format for storing digital data, defined by an openly published specification usually maintained by a standards organization, and which can be used and implemented by anyone. An open file format is licensed with an open license. For example, an open format can be implemented by both proprietary and free and open-source software, using the typical software licenses used by each. In contrast to open file formats, closed file formats are considered trade secrets.

Message-oriented middleware (MOM) is software or hardware infrastructure supporting sending and receiving messages between distributed systems. Message-oriented middleware is in contrast to streaming-oriented middleware where data is communicated as a sequence of bytes with no explicit message boundaries. Note that streaming protocols are almost always built above protocols using discrete messages such as frames (Ethernet), datagrams (UDP), packets (IP), cells (ATM), et al.

The Open Document Format for Office Applications (ODF), also known as OpenDocument, standardized as ISO 26300, is an open file format for word processing documents, spreadsheets, presentations and graphics and using ZIP-compressed XML files. It was developed with the aim of providing an open, XML-based file format specification for office applications.

JSON is an open standard file format and data interchange format that uses human-readable text to store and transmit data objects consisting of name–value pairs and arrays. It is a commonly used data format with diverse uses in electronic data interchange, including that of web applications with servers.

Office Open XML is a zipped, XML-based file format developed by Microsoft for representing spreadsheets, charts, presentations and word processing documents. Ecma International standardized the initial version as ECMA-376. ISO and IEC standardized later versions as ISO/IEC 29500.

A proprietary file format is a file format of a company, organization, or individual that contains data that is ordered and stored according to a particular encoding-scheme, designed by the company or organization to be secret, such that the decoding and interpretation of this stored data is easily accomplished only with particular software or hardware that the company itself has developed. The specification of the data encoding format is not released, or underlies non-disclosure agreements. A proprietary format can also be a file format whose encoding is in fact published, but is restricted through licences such that only the company itself or licensees may use it. In contrast, a open or free format is a file format that is published and free to be used by everybody.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">RM-ODP</span> Reference model in computer science

Reference Model of Open Distributed Processing (RM-ODP) is a reference model in computer science, which provides a co-ordinating framework for the standardization of open distributed processing (ODP). It supports distribution, interworking, platform and technology independence, and portability, together with an enterprise architecture framework for the specification of ODP systems.

The Microsoft Open Specification Promise is a promise by Microsoft, published in September 2006, to not assert its patents, in certain conditions, against implementations of a certain list of specifications.

Storage security is a specialty area of security that is concerned with securing data storage systems and ecosystems and the data that resides on these systems.

Internet Video Coding is a video coding standard. IVC was created by MPEG, and was intended to be a royalty-free video coding standard for use on the Internet, as an alternative to non-free formats such as AVC and HEVC. As such, IVC was designed to only use coding techniques which were not covered by royalty-requiring patents.

References

  1. ↑ Chesbrough, Henry William; Vanhaverbeke, Wim; West, Joel (2008). "Tim Simcoe: 'Chapter 8: Open Standards and Intellectual Property Rights' in Open Innovation: Researching A New Paradigm". Oxford University Press. Retrieved April 25, 2017.
  2. 1 2 Langlois, Richard N. "Technological Standards, Innovation, and Essential Facilities: Toward a Schmpeterian Post-Chicago Approach." (1999).
  3. 1 2 Gordon, Richard L. (1994), "Transaction Costs, Property Rights, and the Limits of Government", Regulation and Economic Analysis, Boston, MA: Springer US, pp. 61–78, doi:10.1007/978-1-4615-2620-9_6, ISBN   978-1-4613-6123-7 , retrieved 2023-06-29
  4. ↑ Greenstein, Shane, and Victor Sango, eds. Standards and Public Policy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2007.
  5. ↑ West, Joel (2006-12-21), Greenstein, Shane; Stango, Victor (eds.), "The economic realities of open standards: black, white, and many shades of gray", Standards and Public Policy (1 ed.), Cambridge University Press, pp. 87–122, doi:10.1017/cbo9780511493249.004, ISBN   978-0-521-86450-3, S2CID   17934389 , retrieved 2023-06-29
  6. ↑ Joel West as cited Greenstein, Shane, and Victor Sango, eds. Standards and Public Policy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2007.
  7. ↑ "Affirmation Statement". OpenStand. Retrieved 2019-07-17.
  8. ↑ "The Modern Standards Paradigm – Five Key Principles". OpenStand. Retrieved 2019-07-17.
  9. ↑ Source: www.open-stand.org
  10. ↑ "ITU-T". www.itu.int. Retrieved 18 March 2018.
  11. ↑ "ITU-T". www.itu.int. Retrieved 18 March 2018.
  12. ↑ "00. ISO standards and patents". isotc.iso.org. Retrieved 18 March 2018.
  13. ↑ BCP 9: The Internet Standards Process
  14. ↑ BCP 78: Rights Contributors Provide to the IETF Trust
  15. ↑ BCP 79: Intellectual Property Rights in IETF Technology
  16. ↑ IETF Trust Legal Provisions (page offers a FAQ for non-lawyers)
  17. 1 2 OpenStand: OpenStand: Principles for The Modern Standard Paradigm
  18. ↑ European Interoperability Framework for pan-European eGovernment Services, Version 1.0 (2004) ISBN   92-894-8389-X page 9
  19. ↑ European Communities (2004), European Interoperability Framework for pan-European eGovernment Services (PDF), retrieved 2016-02-09
  20. ↑ Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium [usurped] , NCOIC Lexicon , 2008
  21. ↑ ""Definitions of Open Standards", 2004" (PDF). itst.dk. Retrieved 18 March 2018.
  22. ↑ ""Loi nº 2004-575" for the Confidence in the Digital Economy," June 21, 2004". legifrance.gouv.fr. Retrieved 18 March 2018.
  23. ↑ Government of India. "Policy on Open Standards for e-Governance" (PDF). Retrieved 25 July 2014.
  24. ↑ "Art. 68 CAD" . Retrieved 25 July 2014.
  25. ↑ ""New Zealand E-Government Interoperability Framework (e-GIF)" version 3.0, June, 22nd 2007" (PDF). e.govt.nz. Archived from the original (PDF) on 16 October 2008. Retrieved 18 March 2018.
  26. ↑ "Law no. 36/2011, of June 21st". diariodarepublica.pt. Retrieved 2023-09-21.
  27. ↑ ""Ley 11/2007" of Public Electronic Access of the Citizens to the Public Services, June, 22nd 2007" (PDF). boe.es. Retrieved 18 March 2018.
  28. ↑ "Government of South Africa, MIOS Version 4.1 2007" (PDF). dpsa.gov.za. Retrieved 18 March 2018.
  29. ↑ Cabinet Office, Open standards principles, published 9 April 2013, updated 5 April 2018
  30. ↑ Cabinet Office, Procurement Policy Note – Use of Open Standards when specifying ICT requirements. Action Note 3/11 31 January 2011, archived by the National Archives, accessed 28 August 2021
  31. ↑ ""Decreto 3390" of Free Software and Open Standards, December, 23rd 2004" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2007-11-09. Retrieved 2007-10-03.
  32. ↑ "Is OpenDocument an Open Standard? Yes!". www.dwheeler.com. Archived from the original on 22 March 2009. Retrieved 18 March 2018.
  33. 1 2 "Open Standards: Principles and Practice". Bruce Perens. Archived from the original on 2006-01-01. Retrieved 2020-02-22.
  34. ↑ "The Meaning of Open Standards". www.csrstds.com. Retrieved 18 March 2018.
  35. ↑ "OOXML: To Be, or Not To Be". efytimes.com. Retrieved 18 March 2018.
  36. ↑ Casson, Tony; Ryan, Patrick S. (May 1, 2006), "Open Standards, Open Source Adoption in the public sector, and their relationship to Microsoft's market dominance", in Sherrie Bolin (ed.), Standards edge: unifier or divider?, Sheridan Books, p. 87, SSRN   1656616
  37. ↑ "Open Standards Requirement for Software – Open Source Initiative". opensource.org. 24 July 2006. Retrieved 18 March 2018.
  38. ↑ Definition of Open Standards World Wide Web Consortium
  39. 1 2 "Defining "Open Standard"". Archived from the original on 2016-04-20. Retrieved 2008-06-03.
  40. ↑ "What is an Open Standard?". Archived from the original on 2010-08-05. Retrieved 2008-06-03.
  41. ↑ https://fsfe.org/freesoftware/standards/def.en.html old ver
  42. ↑ "FFII Workgroup on Open Standards – FFII". 2007-01-18. Archived from the original on 2007-01-18. Retrieved 2021-11-15.
  43. ↑ "Architecture of the World Wide Web, Volume One". www.w3.org. Retrieved 18 March 2018.
  44. ↑ "Publicly Available Standards". standards.iso.org. Retrieved 18 March 2018.
  45. ↑ "Complex singularity versus openness | Joinup". Archived from the original on 2015-04-19. Retrieved 2015-05-06.
  46. ↑ Portable Document File (PDF) format specification Archived October 22, 2005, at the Wayback Machine
  47. ↑ ISO-8652:1995
  48. ↑ "ISO/IEC 8652:1995/Amd 1:2007".
  49. ↑ "ESO and partners launch innovative Data2Dome planetarium system". www.eso.org. Retrieved 27 April 2017.
  50. ↑ OpenReference Initiative: OpenReference frameworks, December 2016
  51. ↑ European Patent Convention Article 52 paragraph (2)(c)
  52. ↑ "European Commission – PRESS RELEASES – Press release – World Standards Day, 14 October: Global standards for the Global Information Society". europa.eu. Retrieved 18 March 2018.
  53. ↑ Nokia Foundation Award to Mårten Mickos
  54. ↑ "Frequently asked questions by the Press – Tim BL". www.w3.org. Retrieved 18 March 2018.
  55. ↑ "The Southern African Telecommunications Networks and Applications Conference (SATNAC) 2005. Opening Address by the Honourable Minister of Science and Technology, Mosibudi Mangena — Department: Science and Technology, South Africa". www.dst.gov.za. Archived from the original on May 9, 2009.

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.