Summing-up discussion Standards, open standards and Interoperability ETSI, Sophia Antipolis, 26 May 2005 Summing-up discussion   Francisco da Silva, Chairman of the ETSI Board

“interoperability” - 1 ... means something different to everybody ... means “interworking” to some people ... means “compatibility” to some people ... means “interoperabilty” to some people (..err what !) to solve it we need to understand it, we need an agreed definition?

“interoperability” - 2 However, everybody agrees this is a business necessity, and there is: increasing demand for Technical Interoperability need to include it in the standards making process benefits for everyone but completely unorganized still being treated as “ad hoc” issue needs a clear public policy End-users are bewildered (and not just them !) Industry and Governments, in particular through and SDOs, have to take the lead namely to guarantee overall coherence

“open” - 1 ... means something different to everybody! ... means “free” to some people! open (availability) = from “you can buy a copy” to “its free on the web” open (IPRs) = from “FRAND conditions apply” to “all IPRs are Royalty-Free” open (process) = opportunity for all stake-holders to participate”

“open” - 2 some examples: IDABC: available “Free-of-Charge” & IPRs “Royalty-Free” but applies only for software in the context of eGovernment ! W3C: available “Free-of-Charge” & IPRs “Royalty-Free”, web culture and FRAND-IPR polices don’t work well together, have a FRAND exception process but never used it (..and maybe never will ?) “free” is not the problem – its the other conditions ! classic SDO: available “Free-of-Charge” or “small-fee”, IPRs on FRAND conditions.

“open source” ... is about implementation/business models not about specification / standardization ... so its IPR perspective is one of a business model, i.e. a different perspective from the one of the standardization activity

“open standards (process)” everybody agrees that we need open standards as a condition for successful interoperability but this is not sufficient, more is needed.. there is much agreement on the overall concepts but differences arise when we start considering the IPR issues

so what needs to be done need to refine concepts such as: “Interworking” “Interoperability” “open standard” “open source” “free” – re. SDO processes “free” – re. implicit implications (IPRs) Is openness of standards: IPR policy dependent, or is it a matter of business models ? software, business & standards people need to start using the same language/concepts IPR policy: can one size fit all (no way?) What needs to be done to solve the Operators problem when the IPR license fees are too high – review FRAND levels in SDO IPR policies ?

Please help us to help you ! what next need to increase consensus building across all stake-holders need to agree on priorities need to accept that there maybe more than one conclusion to choose from ETSI is willing to be a driver in the debate and to provide a place to talk ....and the infrastructure necessary ETSI will organise another hearing on [21 October 2005] Please help us to help you !