As I hope was at least implicit, I was considering
ANSI/ISO/ITU/BSI as Industry
Standards Bodies, not the likes
of
the IETF which come from a very different
heritage.
Of course the former are very open to manipulation and
subversion
- OOXML was hardly the first example of this.
Notwithstanding that, I note
from a fairly cursory bit of
research that IETF isn't free from concerns about
the
effects
of its patent policy - see for example http:/
/www.ietf.org/mail-
archive/web/ipr-wg/current/msg00933.html
The point I
was trying to make (obviously badly !!) is
that going down the
current track
will lead to those with patents that they want
to protect - either for
defensive or revenue-generating
purposes - not offering them to the standards
bodies. The
only route that those patent holders will then have is
"normal"
licensing. Interoperability standards involving
patented technologies will then
in all probability be set
amongst closed consortia.
All in the name of
destroying Linux and Android :-/
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|