DOCUMENT #:
GSC15-TIA-IPR-04
FOR:
Presentation
SOURCE:
TIA
AGENDA ITEM:
4
CONTACT(S):
Amy Marasco (amarasco@microsoft.com)
Kent Baker (kbaker@qualcomm.com)
“Update on Activities of the TIA
IPR Standing Committee (IPR SC) and
the new Standards and IPR Policy
Committee (SIPC) since GSC-14”
Amy Marasco
Global Standards Collaboration (GSC)
GSC-15
Structural Changes
 This presentation focuses on important issues that were
discussed within the TIA IPR Standing Committee
(IPR SC)
• IPR SC’s primary responsibility is to review and maintain
TIA’s IPR Policy and associated Guidelines Document,
which are available on TIA’s Web site www.tiaonline.org
 TIA Board of Directors recently approved the formation
of a new Policy Committee
• New committee is called the Standards and IPR Policy
Committee (SIPC)
• Communicates TIA standards and IPR policy positions externally
• Increased discussion on standards and IPR issues worldwide
2
Summary of Topics
 Activities of the SIPC/IPR SC since GSC-14 in
Geneva (July 2009)
• 2010 Don Purcell Survey on Priorities for Standards
Education
• TIA comments in response to Representative Gordon’s
(Chairman of the Committee on Science and Technology,
U.S. House of Representatives) inquiry regarding the
health of the U.S. standards system and the role of the
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
3
Beijing, 30 Aug. – 2 Sept. 2010
Summary of SIPC/IPR SC Topics (Cont’d)
• Proposed European Interoperability Framework (EIF v.2)
•
TIA comments on the EC White Paper “The Way Forward”
outlining recommendations relating to the European legal
framework for standardization
• British Standards Institute (BSI) draft PAS 98 (standard for
standards bodies)
• TIA comments on proposed SAC rules relating to the
inclusion of patented technology in Chinese national
standards
•
TIA discussion of proposed Government of India Policy on
“Open Standards”
4

2010 Don Purcell Survey on Priorities for
Standards Education
• The Center for Global Standards Analysis (“Center”) initiated a survey
to determine priorities among standards education content and
standards education groups
 In 2008, the Center conducted a global survey to determine
whether corporations, standards development organizations and
other standards groups believe that standards education programs
have a strategic value. The unanimous view of survey respondents
was “yes”.
 In 2009, the Center conducted a survey in part to determine
whether the United States Government should spend additional
resources to create or enhance standards education programs. The
unanimous view of survey respondents (including TIA) was “yes”. A
copy of the Center’s 2008 and 2009 surveys can be obtained by
sending an email to Donald Purcell at
donpurcell@strategicstandards.com.
5
Committee on Science and Technology, U.S.
House of Representatives
 TIA comments to Chairman Gordon’s inquiry regarding the health of the
U.S. standards system
• Technical standards are important to TIA member companies
TIA has more than 70 committees and sub-groups that serve diverse stakeholders
(including U.S. Government)
•These committees produced more than 3,000 standards
Association members and others come to TIA to develop standards that:
•Promote efficiency and interoperability
•Enhance industry collaboration to solve market-driven demands and customer
needs
•Enable access to new technologies and markets
•Help diffuse innovative solutions across the industry while maintaining respect for
intellectual property rights and supporting incentives for companies to further invest
in related R&D
•Create opportunities for further competition among differentiated implementations
and products, which provides stimulus for more innovation and choice for customers
and users
TIA Response to Chairman Gordon (cont.)
• Comprehensive Government Review of U.S. Standards
System Not Needed
“U.S. standards system – which is characterized by its ability
to adapt and to accommodate the needs of a variety of
competing stakeholders – has served its constituents well”
TIA concurred with the findings of The Center for Global
Standards Analysis, “A National Survey of the United States
Standards Policies, August 2009”:
“…the virtually unanimous view from survey respondents is
that current United States policies for the development of
private-sector technology standards are working well, and
that no changes to those policies or the current balance
of private-sector/public sector partnership relating to
standards are necessary at this time.”
7
TIA Response to Chairman Gordon
• U.S. System is Part of an Effective International
Standards Ecosystem
•“The success of the standards [different standards bodies]
produce, however, is not based upon a defined process or
procedure but rather is a result of a number of factors (such as
responsiveness to customer need) that impact ultimate acceptance
by the broader industry. This competition and diversity among
standards bodies has resulted in a dynamic ecosystem that is
very valuable to the similarly dynamic ICT industry sector.”
•U.S. supports the multiple path approach to international
standards

Reflected in the United States Standards Strategy
(http://publicaa.ansi.org/sites/apdl/Documents/Standards%20Activities/NSSC/USSS-2005%20%20FINAL.pdf) and U.S. Government statement (see
http://www.ansi.org/news_publications/news_story.aspx?menuid=7&articleid=2166).
8
European Interoperability Framework (EIF v.2)
 Anticipated publication date late 2010
• Objective is to improve data exchanges between
government bodies and between government bodies
and citizens
• EIF v.1 – definition of “Open Standards” is not
consistent with TIA’s and GSC’s
 EIF v.1 defined “open standards” in part as:
• “The intellectual property – i.e., patents possibly present
– of (parts of) the standard is made irrevocably available
on a royalty-free basis”
• “There are no constraints on the re-use of the standard”
9
Euro Commission (DG Enterprise) White Paper:
 TIA commented on the European Commission (DG Enterprise)
White Paper: “Modernizing ICT Standardisation in the EU: The
Way Forward” outlining proposed changes to the European legal
framework for standardization
• Paper sets forth attributes for standards to be referenced by EU
Government officials
“TIA supports the attributes of openness and a consensus-based
transparent process. TIA also supports the list of attributes the
White Paper enumerates for standards themselves, i.e.,
maintenance, availability, IPR (licensees agree to offer to grant
licenses to their Intellectual Property on (F)RAND terms to
everyone making and selling products that implement the
standard and such license is bilaterally negotiated between the
parties), relevance, neutrality, stability and quality.”
• White Paper aligned with GSC resolution on “open standards”
• Takes a balanced approach on IPR issues
10
TIA Comments on EU White Paper
Sections 2.1 and 2.4 of the White Paper attempt to
distinguish “software standards” from “communications
standards”
•TIA commented that this may not be possible or useful:
“Given convergence of many information and communications
(ICT) technologies, TIA is not convinced that it is possible to
categorize standards in this way. ICT standards, however, can
often be implemented in hardware, software (whether
proprietary, open source or mixed source), or in combinations
thereof.”
IPRs in ICT standards
•(F)RAND framework is working and is effective
•ICT standardization in EU should be predicated upon policies that
encourage innovation and high-performance technologies
Creates economic efficiencies
Encourages innovators to contribute and to re-invest
11
BSI PAS 98
BSI Recently Posted PAS 98 for Public Comment
Publicly Available Specification – BSI PAS 98 Standards
consortia – Part I: Good practice in the establishment and
management of standards-related consortia and Part II:
Evaluating Standards Related Consortia.

Several organizations submitted comments to the effect
that:

ICT standardization benefits from having a variety of different
standardization approaches and none is inherently better than
others
• PAS may be used to assess which standards bodies are
“better” or “more open” than others
•
• TIA IPR PC currently is evaluating this PAS
12
Beijing, 30 Aug. – 2 Sept. 2010
SAC Proposed Rules
 In the fall of 2009, SAC posted proposed rules relating to the
inclusion of patented technology in Chinese national standards
for public comment
 TIA provided comments:
• Patent Disclosure Procedures and Defining Participation
 TIA supports requiring clear patent disclosure procedures
 “RAND” typically is not defined as including “less than
customary license fee”
 Licensing commitments typically only apply to essential
patent claims
13
Government of India Policy
 TIA discussion of proposed Government of India Policy on
“Open Standards”
• 2008 TIA Position Paper Released on “Open Standards”
•The direct link is as follows:
http://www.tiaonline.org/standards/about/documents/TIAIPR_20080620-003_TIA_OPEN_STANDARDS-CLEAN_R4.pdf
 Aligned with GSC resolution on “open standards”
•Paper describes the voluntary, open and consensus-based
standardization process
 Addresses attempts to re-define what constitutes an “Open
Standard” where essential patented technology must be
made available for free, and explains the differences
between Open Source Software and Open Standards
14
Recommendations
 TIA supports GSC-15 reaffirming all three of the
Resolutions previously developed by the GSC SIPC
• GSC-14/22 Intellectual Property Rights Policies
• GSC-14/23 Cooperation with Patent and Trademark
Offices
• GSC-14/24 Open Standards
15
 Thank You!