Editor's Note: The Feb 26 "Week in Review" referenced an e-mail signed by many open source advocates, suggesting a boycott of OASIS standards. OASIS sent this official response.
We are disappointed that Mr. Rosen chose to issue a press statement without first bringing his concerns to OASIS. We operate under an open process and offer ample opportunities for members and non-members alike to provide input to our policies and work. We have contacted Mr. Rosen and look forward to initiating a direct dialogue with open source advocates to express concerns in a productive forum and dispel inaccuracies and miscommunication.
1) The revised OASIS IPR Policy has strengthened not weakened the consortium's commitment to the development of truly open standards. The previous OASIS IPR Policy, which was written in the 90's, did nothing to require or even encourage royalty-free development. The revised Policy now provides OASIS Committees with two options for making RF mandatory.
2) Even as they were developed under the old policy, to the best of our knowledge, there are no approved OASIS Standards that require the payment of a royalty in order to implement software based on those standards, and of the 101 specifications under development (those not yet approved as OASIS Standards), more than 90% can be implemented RF.
3) OASIS advances a wide variety of specifications, which can be implemented in both open source and non-open source software. In this respect, we are similar to ISO, ANSI, and the majority of other SDOs.
4) In today's reality, no standards organization can ensure that its work is or will remain completely free of patent claims. There is always a risk that someone in the world holds a patent that can be claimed as essential for implementation in software on any specific standards project--open source or not. The most any standards organization can do is provide clear, equitable regulations to govern the behavior of those who participate in its work and publicly document the licensing commitment of all participants. The OASIS IPR Policy seeks to create the greatest possible incentive for patent holders to participate productively in an open standards process, responsibly disclose their interests, and make available, without prejudice, licenses for any essential claims they may have.
We acknowledge and respect the open source community, and our revised IPR Policy was designed to offer protection for their interests. We did seek legal review of the revised policy to be sure that it did not prevent the implementation in open source software of OASIS specifications developed under one of the RF modes. We also understand and respect the reality that there is valuable work done outside the open source community, and it is our belief that acknowledging and accepting that work into the broader open standard development process--under an IPR Policy that drives patent disclosure and non-discriminatory licensing--is the best way to serve the needs of the global marketplace.
OASIS encourages all advocates of open source to:
* thoughtfully review the OASIS IPR Policy, where they will discover that RF is not offered as a "secondary option" as characterized by Mr. Rosen. All TCs are presented with three options, the options are not prioritized in any way, and OASIS does not encourage any one option over another. We believe the developers--not OASIS management, not any individual, company, or special interest group--are best qualified to make the choice regarding their own work.
* actively participate within OASIS Committees, where they can productively express their viewpoints--and contribute to decisions affecting the selection of IPR modes.
* share their suggestions and concerns with the OASIS CEO.
Carol Geyer
Director of Communications
OASIS
