[A2k] Struble/Gross/Balasubramaniam in Bridges Monthly Review: Open IT Standards Would Benefit Developing Countries

[thiru@keionline.org]

--------------

 www.ictsd.org  | November =96 December 2007 | No. 7


Open IT Standards Would Benefit Developing Countries

Susy Struble, Robin Gross and Thiru Balasubramaniam

While developing countries have taken many measures to improve their
integration into the knowledge society, many have largely overlooked one
of the most useful tools: open information technology standards.

Information technology (IT) standards are the co-operation agreements, or
specifications, that make networked computing possible. In a network such
as that embodied by the Internet =96 and the myriad applications and device=
s
that use it =96 the standards that matter most are the =91interfaces=92 tha=
t
enable technology users to access their data within the network,
regardless of their choice of computing product or platform.

What Are Open Standards?

=91Open=92 IT standards are not encumbered by legal or technical constraint=
s,
nor do they provide a unique advantage to any party.  Contrary to popular
belief, there is no guarantee that an IT standard is truly
non-discriminatory and =91open=92 just because it is  called a standard; wa=
s
approved by a particular organisation; is supported by a set of vendors,
or; is licensed under =91reasonable and non-discriminatory=92 terms.

The original goal of IT standards was to  enable unfettered integration
and inter- operability on the network. However, with  the introduction of
software patents and  the network=92s increasing value, companies  now ofte=
n
use these standards to manipulate the direction of the network, and
sometimes even to gain illegal competitive advantage. Indeed, recent court
cases =96 such as the US Federal Trade Commission with RAMBUS, the US
Federal Appeals court  ruling against Qualcomm, and even the European
Court of First Instance ruling  against Microsoft =96 show that governments
and the public are starting to wake up to this disintegration of trust in
the standardisation system and the value of interoperability. Some
governments are beginning to investigate how this problem might be
addressed through competition law (Bridges, Year 11 No. 4, page 17).


What Is Being Done?

To mitigate the exclusionary effects of IPRs embedded in international
standards, standard-setting organisations have adopted guidelines that
require their members to disclose patented technology that is =91necessary
for the implementation of a standard=92before the standardisation process
has been completed. Such technology should be made publicly available
under =91reasonable and non-discriminatory terms and conditions=92.1

However, these policies beg a host of questions. Who defines  =96 and how =
=96
what a =91reasonable=92 cost is? Since such terms are almost always covered=
 by
confidentiality clauses in legal contracts, how can anybody know if they
really are non-discriminatory? Who polices the implementation of these
terms? Can they change over time and, if so, how? Are these terms
explicitly and publicly known before the standard=92s adoption? And how
could precluding open source code implementations ever be justified under
the spirit of =91reasonable and non-discriminatory=92 licensing?

Why Does =91Openness=92 Matter?

IT is increasingly embedded into our daily lives and continues to meld
with traditional industries and applications such as healthcare,
transportation, media, security, and telecommunications. Battles over
non-interoperability and consumer access due to a lack of open IT
standards are popping up in unexpected places. The automotive repair
industry provides a good example of this: consumers and non-dealer-owned
repair shops are fighting for access to technical interface information
required for diagnosing and repairing cars, which are quickly becoming
computers on wheels. Another example is the global debate around varying
levels of =91openness=92 in standardised office document formats.

Open IT standards directly benefit society by driving innovation while
mitigating adoption risks. Multiple, competing implementations =96 and
interchangeability between these implementations =96 mean prices drop while
innovation flourishes. In a competitive market, consumers and small
businesses are more likely to find the product that suits their needs,
depending on factors such as price or availability in a native language.
Should their needs change, they can more easily switch to another product.
A corollary benefit to this is creator/user control of data.

The lack of open IT standards can act as a trade barrier if it denies
market access for companies or even whole economies (this point has been
raised by China and others in the WTO Committee on Technical Barriers to
Trade). A particularly onerous burden is placed on developing economies
when their consumers and businesses have to pay royalties or meet other
terms and conditions in order to use IT standards that are not truly open
but still necessary to participate in the network. After all, patents are
a limited monopoly granted by a government. Embedding patents into
technical standards that are required for effective participation in the
information society overextends this monopoly.

Lastly, there are other standardisation-related problems that contribute
to the low participation of developing countries in the global information
society. While these undoubtedly stem from where countries stand in their
IT adoption/diffusion =91lifecycle=92, many of them miss out on the
standards-creation process itself. Their concerns must be taken into
account; after all, they include the majority of the world=92s consumers an=
d
=96 hopefully soon =96 the majority of the world=92s IT users and innovator=
s.

Susy Struble works for the Global Government Strategy group at Sun
Microsystems. Robin Gross is the Executive Director of IP Justice and
Thiru Balasubramaniam is the Geneva representative for Knowledge Ecology
International.

ENDNOTE

1 ( IEC, ISO and ITU. March 2007. Guidelines for the Implementation of the
Common Patent Policy. http://www.iec.ch/tctools/patent-guidelines.htm)

------------------------------------------------------------


Thiru Balasubramaniam
Geneva Representative
Knowledge Ecology International (KEI)
thiru@keionline.org


Tel: +41 22 791 6727
Mobile: +41 76 508 0997