Re: [Fsfe-uk] final gov consultation on Open Standards

[Sam Liddicott]

My comments on: Would this policy support innovation, competition and
choice in delivery of government services?

The policy might be gamed through production of artificial open standards-
that meet the requirements of the policy but which do not have broad vendor
support in that sector.

An infamous example is the Office Open XML specification which enjoyed
little support apart from by Microsoft and required much political
wrangling to receive standards status, in which it has been alleged that
ISO committee members installed with pressure from Microsoft ceased to
function after the standard was ratified, causing real problems for ISO
committees which then had problems reaching a full quorum for further
decisions.

To be simple, the open standards allow wide vendor participation are in
fact a potential benefit which is actually obtained when other vendors
actively and creatively participate.

Office Open XML is arguably a single vendor open standard present not to
deliver benefit to it's users but for it's controllers by expanding their
marking to include customers requiring open standards.

The policy will support innovation and competition if proper consideration
is given to the use and wide support of the standard rather than just the
apparent openness.



Does a promise of non-assertion of a patent when used in open source
software alleviate concerns relating to patents and royalty charging?

Promise of non-assertion is weaker than a patent license, and may not be
honoured by others who might purchase patent rights at a future time.

On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Glyn Wintle <address@hidden> wrote:

> Goverment Open Standards consultation has just gone live. This is
> important stuff http://consultation.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/openstandards/Please 
> respond
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fsfe-uk mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fsfe-uk
>