Giving Process Its Due When a Standard Development Organization Changes the Rules of the Game

G. Willingmyre
{"title":"Giving Process Its Due When a Standard Development Organization Changes the Rules of the Game","authors":"G. Willingmyre","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2903602","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The process a Standards Developing Organization (SDO) employs to revise its patent policy is an aspect of the SDO’s competitive posture in the global marketplace. Research and publications about the substance of SDO patent policies are widely available. But a dearth of research exists on the processes SDOs employ to revise their patent policies. Generally, the processes an SDO uses to revise its patent policy are part of the governance processes of the SDO. As a baseline, the governance processes of an SDO must be consistent with the applicable legal system defining what is acceptable and unacceptable behavior. What an SDO says about its governance processes is a further consideration. Thus the procedures themselves, the procedures’ relationship to the applicable legal system and what the SDO says about the procedures all play a role in understanding how an SDO revises its patent policy. SDOs place varying priorities on the role of balance among the SDO’s constituencies and the dependence on consensus decision making in revising their patent policies. The processes of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI); the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers Standards Association (IEEE-SA); the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI); the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF); and the combined International Organization for Standardization, International Electrotechnical Commission and the International Telecommunications Union (ISO/IEC/ITU) illustrate this variety of approaches. The process an SDO uses initially to define its patent policy has different implications than the process an SDO employs to revise its patent policy. This is primarily due to the diverse interests that participants have in the legacy standards of the SDO that could be impacted by revisions of the patent policy. Two discriminators - the extent to which an SDO requires or encourages balance among the SDO’s constituencies and the relative importance of consensus decision making - are key to distinguishing among SDO processes for revising their patent policy. Any revision of an SDO’s patent policy has potential to benefit or harm participants and users of the standards. In choosing the priority to place on balance among constituencies in the revision process, SDOs make important decisions based on the diverse interests and numbers of constituents in its standards setting process … and the needs of constituent users of the SDO’s standards. The greater use of “consensus decision making” promotes greater general support for the outcomes of the revision process.","PeriodicalId":314810,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Rules of the Game (Topic)","volume":"2473 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Rules of the Game (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2903602","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The process a Standards Developing Organization (SDO) employs to revise its patent policy is an aspect of the SDO’s competitive posture in the global marketplace. Research and publications about the substance of SDO patent policies are widely available. But a dearth of research exists on the processes SDOs employ to revise their patent policies. Generally, the processes an SDO uses to revise its patent policy are part of the governance processes of the SDO. As a baseline, the governance processes of an SDO must be consistent with the applicable legal system defining what is acceptable and unacceptable behavior. What an SDO says about its governance processes is a further consideration. Thus the procedures themselves, the procedures’ relationship to the applicable legal system and what the SDO says about the procedures all play a role in understanding how an SDO revises its patent policy. SDOs place varying priorities on the role of balance among the SDO’s constituencies and the dependence on consensus decision making in revising their patent policies. The processes of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI); the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers Standards Association (IEEE-SA); the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI); the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF); and the combined International Organization for Standardization, International Electrotechnical Commission and the International Telecommunications Union (ISO/IEC/ITU) illustrate this variety of approaches. The process an SDO uses initially to define its patent policy has different implications than the process an SDO employs to revise its patent policy. This is primarily due to the diverse interests that participants have in the legacy standards of the SDO that could be impacted by revisions of the patent policy. Two discriminators - the extent to which an SDO requires or encourages balance among the SDO’s constituencies and the relative importance of consensus decision making - are key to distinguishing among SDO processes for revising their patent policy. Any revision of an SDO’s patent policy has potential to benefit or harm participants and users of the standards. In choosing the priority to place on balance among constituencies in the revision process, SDOs make important decisions based on the diverse interests and numbers of constituents in its standards setting process … and the needs of constituent users of the SDO’s standards. The greater use of “consensus decision making” promotes greater general support for the outcomes of the revision process.
当标准开发组织改变游戏规则时,给予过程应有的尊重
标准开发组织(SDO)用于修改其专利政策的过程是SDO在全球市场中竞争态势的一个方面。关于SDO专利政策实质的研究和出版物广泛可用。但是,关于sdo修改其专利政策的过程的研究却很缺乏。通常,SDO用于修改其专利策略的过程是SDO治理过程的一部分。作为基线,SDO的治理过程必须与定义可接受和不可接受行为的适用法律系统保持一致。SDO对其治理过程的描述需要进一步考虑。因此,程序本身、程序与适用法律体系的关系以及SDO对程序的描述都在理解SDO如何修改其专利政策方面发挥作用。SDO将不同的优先级放在SDO选区之间的平衡角色和修改其专利政策时对共识决策的依赖上。美国国家标准协会(ANSI)的流程;电气和电子工程师协会标准协会(IEEE-SA);欧洲电信标准协会(ETSI);互联网工程任务组(IETF);国际标准化组织、国际电工委员会和国际电信联盟(ISO/IEC/ITU)联合说明了这种不同的方法。SDO最初用于定义其专利策略的过程与SDO用于修改其专利策略的过程具有不同的含义。这主要是由于参与者对SDO的遗留标准有不同的兴趣,这些兴趣可能会受到专利政策修订的影响。两个区别因素——SDO要求或鼓励SDO选区之间平衡的程度,以及共识决策的相对重要性——是区分修改其专利政策的SDO流程的关键。SDO专利政策的任何修订都有可能使标准的参与者和用户受益或受损。为了在修订过程中选择优先级,SDO根据其标准设置过程中的不同利益和组成部分的数量,以及SDO标准的组成部分用户的需求,做出重要的决策。更多地使用“协商一致决策”促进对修订过程的结果的更大的普遍支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信