Open standard
The term "standard" is sometimes restricted to technologies approved by formalized committees that are open to participation by all interested parties and operate on a consensus basis.
On the standard organisation side, the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) ensures that its specifications can be implemented on a royalty-free basis.
The IETF and ITU-T use definitions of "open standard" that allow "reasonable and non-discriminatory" patent licensing fee requirements.
[2] The typical example of "open source" that has become a standard is the personal computer originated by IBM and now referred to as Wintel, the combination of the Microsoft operating system and Intel microprocessor.
Buyers tend to prefer open standards which they believe offer them cheaper products and more choice for access due to network effects and increased competition between vendors.
[7][8] Standards developed using the OpenStand principles are developed through an open, participatory process, support interoperability, foster global competition, are voluntarily adopted on a global level and serve as building blocks for products and services targeted to meet the needs of markets and consumers.
[9] The ITU-T is a standards development organization (SDO) that is one of the three sectors of the International Telecommunication Union (a specialized agency of the United Nations).
[15] The changes are intended to be compatible with the "Simplified BSD License" as stated in the IETF Trust Legal Provisions and Copyright FAQ based on RFC 5377.
This captures "the effective and efficient standardization processes that have made the Internet and Web the premiere platforms for innovation and borderless commerce".
To reach interoperability in the context of pan-European eGovernment services, guidance needs to focus on open standards.
The word "open" is here meant in the sense of fulfilling the following requirements: The Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC) defines open standard as the following: Specifications for hardware and/or software that are publicly available implying that multiple vendors can compete directly based on the features and performance of their products.
[20] The Danish government has attempted to make a definition of open standards,[21] which also is used in pan-European software development projects.
It states: The French Parliament approved a definition of "open standard" in its "Law for Confidence in the Digital Economy.
In it, Open Standards are defined thus: a) Its adoption is fruit off an open decision process accessible to all interested parties; b) The specifications document must have been freely published, allowing its copy, distribution and use without restrictions; c) The specifications document cannot cover undocumented actions of processes; d) The applicable intellectual property rights, including patents, have been made available in a full, irrevocable and irreversible way to the Portuguese State; e) There are no restrictions to its implementation.
[29] The Cabinet Office in the UK recommends that government departments specify requirements using open standards when undertaking procurement exercises in order to promote interoperability and re-use, and avoid technological lock-in.
One of the most popular definitions of the term "open standard", as measured by Google ranking, is the one developed by Bruce Perens.
An open standard is publicly available, and developed, approved and maintained via a collaborative and consensus driven process.
This captures "the effective and efficient standardization processes that have made the Internet and Web the premiere platforms for innovation and borderless commerce".
Its more complete definition as follows: A key defining property is that an open standard is immune to vendor capture at all stages in its life-cycle.
A robust definition of "free and open standard" must thus take into account the direct economic conflict between vendors and the market at large.
"[39] The Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) uses a definition which is based on the European Interoperability Framework v.1, and was extended after consultation with industry and community stakeholders.
Version 3 of the GNU General Public License includes a section that enjoins anyone who distributes a program released under the GPL from enforcing patents on subsequent users of the software or derivative works.
In fact, this element discourages some standards bodies from adopting an "open" approach, fearing that they will lose out if their members are more constrained than non-members.
[citation needed] Examples of patent claims brought against standards previously thought to be open include JPEG and the Rambus case over DDR SDRAM.
[2] [...] The tsunami that devastated South Eastern Asian countries and the north-eastern parts of Africa, is perhaps the most graphic, albeit unfortunate, demonstration of the need for global collaboration, and open ICT standards.
The incalculable loss of life and damage to property was exacerbated by the fact that responding agencies and non-governmental groups were unable to share information vital to the rescue effort.
