Comments on: The OSP Will Apply To Future Versions of DIS29500… http://osrin.net/2008/03/the-osp-will-apply-to-future-versions-of-dis29500/ Notes from fourty one degrees south... Thu, 01 Jul 2010 05:45:51 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Peter Gent http://osrin.net/2008/03/the-osp-will-apply-to-future-versions-of-dis29500/comment-page-1/#comment-2646 Peter Gent Mon, 02 Jun 2008 11:06:37 +0000 http://osrin.net/2008/03/27/the-osp-will-apply-to-future-versions-of-dis29500/#comment-2646 hAl, It is quite irrelevant what rules Ecma has since we discuss the ISO standard, not any Ecma standard. Even then, it doesn't help what those rules says unless they are referenced in the actual OSP. Implementers only has what Microsoft themselves promise. If Microsoft doesn't fulfill its obligations versus Ecma or ISO it is only an issue between Microsoft and ISO or Ecma. The implementers are out in the cold. Oliver, Further problems. Even if Microsoft were to add such language as you post here, it will still not get close to what Sun has for ODF. Sun has, since they refer to the rules of OASIS, already committed themselves for obligations given *even* if they no longer participate. The rules of OASIS, se section 11, states so and Sun by referring to those rules in their Patent Statement, are bound by them. If Sun leaves, and no longer participate, their obligations of already given promises, will continue into future versions of ODF. This is not the case for Microsoft. If Microsoft leaves, patent promises given for already existing features in OOXLM will no longer be covered in future versions. ISO and Ecma will have to then toss out all such sections of the standard. This is not the case for ODF and Sun. Microsoft should thus either refer to some rules, if any exists, of ISO and Ecma that has such commitment or insert it in their own OSP. Otherwise Microsoft can basically put forward a veto on future changes, threatening to leave. Not a healthy situation. hAl,

It is quite irrelevant what rules Ecma has since we discuss the ISO standard, not any Ecma standard. Even then, it doesn’t help what those rules says unless they are referenced in the actual OSP. Implementers only has what Microsoft themselves promise. If Microsoft doesn’t fulfill its obligations versus Ecma or ISO it is only an issue between Microsoft and ISO or Ecma. The implementers are out in the cold.

Oliver,

Further problems. Even if Microsoft were to add such language as you post here, it will still not get close to what Sun has for ODF. Sun has, since they refer to the rules of OASIS, already committed themselves for obligations given *even* if they no longer participate. The rules of OASIS, se section 11, states so and Sun by referring to those rules in their Patent Statement, are bound by them.

If Sun leaves, and no longer participate, their obligations of already given promises, will continue into future versions of ODF. This is not the case for Microsoft. If Microsoft leaves, patent promises given for already existing features in OOXLM will no longer be covered in future versions. ISO and Ecma will have to then toss out all such sections of the standard. This is not the case for ODF and Sun.

Microsoft should thus either refer to some rules, if any exists, of ISO and Ecma that has such commitment or insert it in their own OSP. Otherwise Microsoft can basically put forward a veto on future changes, threatening to leave. Not a healthy situation.

]]> By: Jesper Lund Stocholm http://osrin.net/2008/03/the-osp-will-apply-to-future-versions-of-dis29500/comment-page-1/#comment-1604 Jesper Lund Stocholm Thu, 24 Apr 2008 10:09:48 +0000 http://osrin.net/2008/03/27/the-osp-will-apply-to-future-versions-of-dis29500/#comment-1604 Oliver, Do you have any updated information on when the "future versions" will be reflected in the OSP? Oliver,

Do you have any updated information on when the “future versions” will be reflected in the OSP?

]]> By: Aatish Ramkaran : Technically speaking... http://osrin.net/2008/03/the-osp-will-apply-to-future-versions-of-dis29500/comment-page-1/#comment-1194 Aatish Ramkaran : Technically speaking... Fri, 28 Mar 2008 14:56:22 +0000 http://osrin.net/2008/03/27/the-osp-will-apply-to-future-versions-of-dis29500/#comment-1194 <strong>Improvements to the Open Specification Promise on Open XML...</strong> Open Source Developers - this is great news for you! Microsoft's Open Specification Promise (OSP) grants... Improvements to the Open Specification Promise on Open XML…

Open Source Developers – this is great news for you! Microsoft’s Open Specification Promise (OSP) grants…

]]> By: oliver http://osrin.net/2008/03/the-osp-will-apply-to-future-versions-of-dis29500/comment-page-1/#comment-1185 oliver Fri, 28 Mar 2008 06:57:49 +0000 http://osrin.net/2008/03/27/the-osp-will-apply-to-future-versions-of-dis29500/#comment-1185 What can I say? I'm highly optimistic by nature. :) Future versions will be covered! We're committed. What can I say? I’m highly optimistic by nature. :)

Future versions will be covered! We’re committed.

]]> By: Jesper Lund Stocholm http://osrin.net/2008/03/the-osp-will-apply-to-future-versions-of-dis29500/comment-page-1/#comment-1183 Jesper Lund Stocholm Fri, 28 Mar 2008 06:47:24 +0000 http://osrin.net/2008/03/27/the-osp-will-apply-to-future-versions-of-dis29500/#comment-1183 Oliver, I couldn't help but notice that the word "IS29500" is in the text. Will this mean that in case DIS 29500 fails tomorrow - will the OSP (and specifically this addition) not apply? Oliver,

I couldn’t help but notice that the word “IS29500″ is in the text. Will this mean that in case DIS 29500 fails tomorrow – will the OSP (and specifically this addition) not apply?

]]> By: oliver http://osrin.net/2008/03/the-osp-will-apply-to-future-versions-of-dis29500/comment-page-1/#comment-1177 oliver Thu, 27 Mar 2008 23:14:52 +0000 http://osrin.net/2008/03/27/the-osp-will-apply-to-future-versions-of-dis29500/#comment-1177 Thanks for this, good comments. As you all say, our intent here needs to be absolutely clear, and you all raise points that we will consider. Give me some time to run this by a couple of internal groups. In the mean time the commitment to support future versions remains strong, which is the important point! More to come. Thanks for this, good comments. As you all say, our intent here needs to be absolutely clear, and you all raise points that we will consider. Give me some time to run this by a couple of internal groups.

In the mean time the commitment to support future versions remains strong, which is the important point!

More to come.

]]> By: hAl http://osrin.net/2008/03/the-osp-will-apply-to-future-versions-of-dis29500/comment-page-1/#comment-1176 hAl Thu, 27 Mar 2008 22:31:50 +0000 http://osrin.net/2008/03/27/the-osp-will-apply-to-future-versions-of-dis29500/#comment-1176 It is an almost meaningless addition to the OSP promise. The Ecma code of conduct in patent matters: http://www.ecma-international.org/memento/codeofconduct.htm already requires RAND licensing of OOXML as long as your partipate on new versions or even when you just vote to approve on new versions in Ecma. It is an almost meaningless addition to the OSP promise. The Ecma code of conduct in patent matters:
http://www.ecma-international.org/memento/codeofconduct.htm
already requires RAND licensing of OOXML as long as your partipate on new versions or even when you just vote to approve on new versions in Ecma.

]]> By: Inigo http://osrin.net/2008/03/the-osp-will-apply-to-future-versions-of-dis29500/comment-page-1/#comment-1172 Inigo Thu, 27 Mar 2008 17:21:09 +0000 http://osrin.net/2008/03/27/the-osp-will-apply-to-future-versions-of-dis29500/#comment-1172 Oliver, This is a positive step, thank you. However, could you please clarify what "participates in the revision process to completion" means, please? To me it seems rather ill-defined. Thank you, Inigo Oliver,

This is a positive step, thank you.

However, could you please clarify what “participates in the revision process to completion” means, please? To me it seems rather ill-defined.

Thank you,

Inigo

]]> By: Brian Jones: Open XML Formats http://osrin.net/2008/03/the-osp-will-apply-to-future-versions-of-dis29500/comment-page-1/#comment-1164 Brian Jones: Open XML Formats Thu, 27 Mar 2008 14:58:15 +0000 http://osrin.net/2008/03/27/the-osp-will-apply-to-future-versions-of-dis29500/#comment-1164 <strong>The OSP will apply to DIS 29500 (Open XML) going forward...</strong> Oliver has a post today discussing this, as it's come up a lot in the discussions he's been having: http://osrin.net/2008/03/27/the-osp-will-apply-to-future-versions-of-dis29500/... The OSP will apply to DIS 29500 (Open XML) going forward…

Oliver has a post today discussing this, as it’s come up a lot in the discussions he’s been having: http://osrin.net/2008/03/27/the-osp-will-apply-to-future-versions-of-dis29500/...

]]> By: Rob Weir http://osrin.net/2008/03/the-osp-will-apply-to-future-versions-of-dis29500/comment-page-1/#comment-1161 Rob Weir Thu, 27 Mar 2008 12:14:41 +0000 http://osrin.net/2008/03/27/the-osp-will-apply-to-future-versions-of-dis29500/#comment-1161 I don't even know what "participate in the revision process" means in JTC1. Companies don't participate at all in JTC1, only NB's and Liaisons do. The OASIS promise, which binds IBM as well, is much clearer. If you are a TC member for 60 days, and remain a TC member 7 days after a Committee Draft is released, then you are obligated to the OASIS IPR terms if that draft ever is approved as a Committee Specification or an OASIS Standard. Since the OASIS process has a built-in 15-day delay between the approval of a Committee Specification and the start of a ballot for an OASIS Standard, it is crystal clear to anyone voting in OASIS (or later in JTC1) exactly what companies are obliged. There is no loophole for companies to drop out of the process on the last day of the ballot period, as the revised OSP seems to allow. I don’t even know what “participate in the revision process” means in JTC1. Companies don’t participate at all in JTC1, only NB’s and Liaisons do.

The OASIS promise, which binds IBM as well, is much clearer. If you are a TC member for 60 days, and remain a TC member 7 days after a Committee Draft is released, then you are obligated to the OASIS IPR terms if that draft ever is approved as a Committee Specification or an OASIS Standard. Since the OASIS process has a built-in 15-day delay between the approval of a Committee Specification and the start of a ballot for an OASIS Standard, it is crystal clear to anyone voting in OASIS (or later in JTC1) exactly what companies are obliged. There is no loophole for companies to drop out of the process on the last day of the ballot period, as the revised OSP seems to allow.

]]>