On 16/7/24 12:38, Simon Phipps wrote:
Hi!
On Tue, Jul 16, 2024 at 5:09 PM Roland Turner via License-discuss
<license-discuss@lists.opensource.org> wrote:
It's not a revenue question. The important issue is that all
copies of
an interoperability standard must say the same thing, or
interoperability itself is defeated.
Having watched the recent debacle at ISO over Schematron, PDF and
other specs, and observed the impassioned positions of the various
standards entities arguing within the ISO special committee on free
availability of specifications, I can assure you that it's very much a
revenue question for the /de jure/ standards organisations who are
still living in a prior millennium and funding their activities from
its norms.
You are confusing two separate issues:
1. That a handful of [mostly older] technical standards bodies are
insisting upon per-copy payments for [most] standards, as the basis
of their business model, even when transferred electronically.
2. That technical interoperability standards must distributed without
their meaning being changed, in order for them to be a basis for
interoperability.
#1 is obviously true, and I didn't claim otherwise. You are responding
as though I claimed that #1 wasn't happening.
The need for interoperability standards to not have their meaning
changed applies equally to standards organisations which:
* have never charged for their standards (IETF as the obvious example)
* no longer charge for most/all of their standards when transferred
electronically (e.g. ITU)
* still charge for most/all of their standards, even when transferred
electronically (e.g. ISO and its national members)
None of the freedoms which OSI cares about are harmed by this fact by
itself. Questions about whether licensees are free to distribute
unmodified copies, or derived works (e.g. an updated or modified
standard) under a plainly different name, and what additional terms
might apply to such redistribution, would appear to be very much of
interest to OSI, and is what appears to be under discussion here.
- Roland
_______________________________________________
The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not
necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Official statements by the
Open Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address.
License-discuss mailing list
License-discuss@lists.opensource.org
http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
