23 Sep 2008
IBM has declared that it will review its membership with bodies that set standards for the technology industry.
The decision follows the acceptance of Microsoft's Open XML format by the International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO), a recognition that IBM deems unethical.
"One event that our announcement is not entirely the outcome of, but that is difficult to overlook, is the adoption of Microsoft's OXML format," said Jonathan Sage, IBM governmental programme executive. "It proved that bodies such as the ISO can be gamed."
IBM backed the rival Open Document Format that had already been certified as an ISO standard. The company claims that Microsoft's format was only accepted because it was fast-tracked and the bodies bowed to political pressure.
Big Blue explained that it is launching a review because certain bodies carry what it described as opaque process and complicated intellectual property policies, and can be easily manipulated.
Standards are important because they allow electronic devices and software programmes to interoperate with one another, the company said.
IBM also claimed that its unmatched market share in the technology industry often makes its contributions critical to decisions made by standards bodies.
The vendor hopes its move will ensure that technology decisions and dispute resolutions are made fairly by independent participants, and that intellectual property policies become clearer and more consistent to enable more informed decision making by standards developers.
"Common, open and consensus-based technology standards from reputable standards bodies help ensure that each of us can easily purchase and interchangeably use computing technology from multiple vendors," said Bob Sutor, IBM vice president of open source and standards.
IBM expects its move to prompt the standard bodies to take action and carefully analyse their procedures, Sage added.
"If the standard bodies do not improve, they will be questioned by other members," he warned.
Open XML can only be considered an "Open Standard" if it does not require the use of Patented or Copyrighted technology - i.e. does not run the risk of requiring royalties to be paid, or its use curtailed by any company claiming "ownership" of part or all of the standard.
Does Open XML meet these two most important criteria? Or have lawyers, as the press would seem to suggest, been allowed to put forward a standard that clearly ignores these two basic criteria by, for example, requiring that royalties be paid or "a mandatory piece of software" be purchased before the standard takes full effect.
Open XML is certainly (going to be) a de facto standard, but should it be considered a de jure standard just because some standards body (or bodies) has voted to "allow" it?
Surely the answer is, then, that if a standard becomes so "de jure" (= by law) all rights to monies on patents and copyrights surrounding the use of that standard automatically fall away.
Posted by: Gordon Docherty 24 Sep 2008
Have your say on this article
Newsletters
Latest stories from Management
Latest videos
You may also like
Management jobs
Technology Patent Wars
Case studies from large organisations across all sectors
... And rich media, and flexible working, and peaks in traffic ...
Upcoming Events
Join us for this Computing web seminar, in which the Head of BI at the Co-operative Group Nick Colebourn will be explaining just how he reigned in the Group’s sprawling database estate and how significant savings were realised and data quality improved as a result.
Date: 31 May 2012
Time: 11:00 AM
Live June 13th 11:00am: Register now. During this web seminar we will be looking at the sorts of incidents that can bring data centres grinding to a halt and what can be done about them.
Date: 13 Jun 2012
Time: 11:00 am
Receive the latest jobs direct to your inbox
Are you being paid what you are worth?
