The benefits from diversity and the risks of government intervention were at the center of the discussion during TalkStandards’ open forum on the issue of SSO Governance on January 28, 2010.
Oliver Bell (Reforming the Reformist Agenda) highlighted the benefits associated with a range of diversified SSOs. His claim is that today’s SSOs exist in an ecosystem formed by a dynamic market and the diversity we see, offers the prerequisite flexibility, competition and choice, for this market. No standard produced by an SSO or standards setting process, can be said to be “better” than that of another SSO or even guaranteed to hold “some level of immediate intrinsic value”. Therefore, when speaking of reforming SSOs, the focus should not be on simplifying the industry as a whole and hence decreasing the broad array of processes available today; but rather the inclusion of a “broader array of voices collaborating” to evolve the processes we have today towards meet the needs we know industry will have in the future. He concludes that although the vast diversity present in the ICT standards setting process can lead to a fair amount of confusion and frustration; the current system of diversified SSOs provides a solid platform to build upon.
Anne Layne-Farrar discussed the implications that arise from government intervention into SSOs’ governance models (Greasing the Gears or Gumming Them Up? The Government’s Role in Standard Setting Governance). Layne-Farrar points to the dangers of imposing a cap on licensing fees imposed by patent holders for intellectual property deemed essential to the standard. Specifically, she covers a model of limiting the maximum rate to that of the incremental value contributed by the IPR. She suggests that an imposition such as this would seriously decrease the economic incentives of innovation and fails to address the difficulty inherent in determining this incremental value. Furthermore, a trade off is to be made between the degree of openness and consensus and the speed of the standard setting process. Any government mandated rule would simply provide a one-size-fits-all solution which would ignore the diversity seen among SSOs today.
Ajit Jaokar (The Open Web Foundation and the Evolution of Web SSO?) shared his experiences from the Open Web Foundation. He expresses his belief that the OWF fills a gap in the SSO market as it essentially functions as a community-driven incubator of standards and because of its democratic ethos. Also, the OWF offers flexibility and openness, brings together formal and informal standards and addresses issues of future development. Thus, Ajit finishes by raising the question: Is the path chosen by the OWF a shape of things to come?
In an exclusive interview, Per Andersen, Managing Director of IDC Nordic and Benelux discussed the difficulties of setting criteria for openness in order to compare SSOs, since no unambiguous result can be found due to the loosely defined meaning of “openness”. This, he said, led to his study rather comparing “nuances of openness” in all aspects, from IPR policies to meeting documentation. Further, Andersen described the public sector interest in open standards as political strategy, and pointed out that such governmental involvement is rarely successful, especially not when rules are imposed in areas where market dynamics are much better instruments for achieving their goals.
In a second interview, Peter Brown, OASIS Board Chairman, gave valuable insights into the governance of OASIS. The market success of OASIS, he said, has been the result of confidence, which in turn has been achieved through OASIS’s transparency policies covering the entire standards setting process. This high level of confidence has been critical due to OASIS’s active involvement in areas such as eID and eHealth, where personal integrity is vital. Brown also discussed his belief that OASIS would not respond to any governmental attempts to influence the governance of the organization, although he has not yet seen any such attempts manifested. In conclusion, he welcomed the debate on SSO transparency. While he believes that many bodies are reluctant to open up because they are reliant on monetizing on standards, OASIS will remain vigilant and continue to push for the development and implementation of open standards.
