Comments on: OASIS patent policy sparks boycott

Leaders in the open-source movement act against a policy OASIS had promoted as an olive branch.

Is it a standards body?

The question is "Do they want to be a standards body?"

If they are merely an industry association, then it's quite reasonable for them to publish any specifications that they choose. Including patented ones.

If they want to be a standards body, then they need to take care that they standards they publish are the appropriate and correct ways to do things.

Patented things are, by their natrue, inappropriate in many circumstances unless they have been, e.g., dedicated to the public. But no group that issues "standards" that contains patents deserves to be considered as a standards body. At best they could be a reputable industry association. And they could publish widely useful specifications. But that's the most that they could be.

If they want to be a standards body, then they must publish standards, and calling a frog a table doesn't make it one.

[Ubber geek]

dedicated to the public

http://www.analogstereo.com/alfa_romeo_spider_owners_manual.htm

[qazwiz]

Royalties in ten percent NOW.... but in the future....

to Open Source, royalties are akin to sin which has been likened to yeast, it only takes a tiny bit to permeate throughout the whole loaf. and with ten percent of the policies being distasteful they will, in the future, be weighted by how often each is actually used. If the entire industry adopted the stated set of standards, but only implemented a subset of that so-called 10% then it becomes a 100% royalty implemented system. no actual difference from the current system.

0% royalty is the only option for a truly Open Source world. There is plenty of money to be made by selling support to truly innovative ideas, and the business world goes with the experts. Who is more qualified to give support for an item that its innovator? so Who will the businessman, looking for best qualified support team, choose?