This should be okay for publication now.

svn path=/trunk/; revision=11436

projects/os/os.en.xhtml

@@ -53,7 +53,12 @@
 
     <dynamic-content />     
       
-    <h3>Publications at IGF</h3>
+    <ul>
+      <li>"<a href="ps.html">Analysis on balance: Standardisation and Patents</a>"<br />by <a href="/about/greve/">Georg Greve</a></li>
+    </ul>
+
+    <h3>Publications at the IGF</h3>
+
     <ul>
       <li>"<a href="/projects/igf/sovsoft">Sovereign Software: Open Standards, Free Software, and the Internet</a>"<br />FSFE contribution to the first <a href="/projects/igf/igf">IGF</a>, by <a href="/about/greve/">Georg Greve</a></li>
     </ul>

projects/os/ps.en.xhtml

@@ -9,15 +9,19 @@
 
 <h1 align="center">Analysis on balance:<br />Standardisation and Patents</h1>
 
-<h3 align="right">-- by <a href="/about/greve/">Georg C. F. Greve</a><br />
-FSFE, President</h3>
-
 <p class="indent"><em>This paper provides an analysis of the
-    interaction of patents and standards. It was written under the
-    assumption of very little background knowledge, and therefore
-    provides some of the background necessary to understand the
-    issue. An expert in the field should be able to skip the
-    Background section.
+    interaction of patents and standards and finishes with some
+    concrete proposals to address the most pressing issues. It was
+    written under the assumption of very little background knowledge,
+    and therefore provides some of the background necessary to
+    understand the issue. An expert in the field should be able to
+    skip the Background section.
+</em></p>
+
+<p align="right"><em>
+-- <b><a href="/about/greve/">Georg C. F. Greve</a></b>
+<br />FSFE, President
+<br />2. December 2008
 </em></p>
 
 <h2>Introduction</h2>
@@ -184,7 +188,7 @@ FSFE, President</h3>
   on a standard use this mechanism to commit to licensing terms while
   the standard is still being drafted. If these terms are not
   acceptable to the other parties working on the standard, the
-  technology that is covered by the patent is not included into the
+  technology that is covered by the patent is not included in the
   standard.</p>
 
 <p>What are acceptable terms is highly subjective. A large corporation
@@ -289,7 +293,7 @@ FSFE, President</h3>
   favors large companies, which not only have deeper pockets, they
   also have larger legal departments and patent portfolios.</p>
 
-<p>It is this uncertainty that has caused great frustration among SME,
+<p>It is this uncertainty that has caused great frustration among SMEs,
   which Charles Schulz of Ars Aperta summarised as RAND referring to
   "RANDom licensing at the sight of competitors."
   In <a href="http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/ict/policy/standards/ws08ipr/presentations/25schulz_en.pdf">his
@@ -344,7 +348,7 @@ FSFE, President</h3>
 <p>In standards, the situation is somewhat similar. If patents are
   part of a standard, only an implementation that is covered by the
   patents provides an effective antitdote to monopolisation. Having to
-  circumvent patents will break standards compliance and harm the
+  circumvent patents will generally break standards compliance and harm the
   public benefit that is the driving force behind standardisation.</p>
 
 <p>So patents in standards have the potential to make full
@@ -360,8 +364,8 @@ FSFE, President</h3>
   exists that would have the additional value of not violating a
   potential patent on the standard, an implementor would choose to
   follow the technologically inferior standard in order to have full
-  access to the market. Such a case turns the initial idea upside
-  down: The technology is valuable because it is patented, not
+  access to the market. Such a case reverts the initial idea of
+  patenting: The technology is valuable because it is patented, not
   patented because it is valuable.</p>
 
 <p>There are also cases where certain standardisation organisations,
@@ -387,8 +391,8 @@ FSFE, President</h3>
 
 <h2>Attempted remedies</h2>
 
-<p>Good patent research costs around 100.000 EUR according to Rigo
-   Wenning, Legal Counsel &amp; Patent Policy Team Contact of the
+<p>Good patent research costs around 100.000 EUR per case according to
+   Rigo Wenning, Legal Counsel &amp; Patent Policy Team Contact of the
    W3C/ERCIM who spoke about
    "<a href="http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/ict/policy/standards/ws08ipr/presentations/22wenning_en.pdf">Standards,
    Patents and the Dynamics of Innovation on the Web</a>." The W3C is
@@ -477,13 +481,12 @@ order to preserve its business."</em></quote>
   in the past. But some basic parameters have changed, while patents
   have been extended in an essentially unreflected way to more
   areas. This is particularly true for software, where patents play no
-  meaningful role in disclosure, breaking the patent deal for
-  society. More importantly, while the time of bringing new innovation
-  to the market and the time between groundbreaking discoveries has
-  been decreasing.</p>
+  meaningful role in disclosure, breaking the patent deal for society
+  whereas the time of bringing new innovation to the market and the
+  time between groundbreaking discoveries has been decreasing.</p>
 
 <p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Kurzweil">Raymond
-    Kurzweil</a> found an exponential pattern in innovation reach back
+    Kurzweil</a> found an exponential pattern in innovation reaching back
     all the way to single-cell organisms. Concluding that this must be
     a universal principle, Mr Kurzweil has been
     making <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predictions_made_by_Raymond_Kurzweil">predictions</a>
@@ -525,7 +528,7 @@ order to preserve its business."</em></quote>
 
 <h2>Potential Remedies</h2>
 
-<h3>Interoperability trumps patent</h3>
+<h3>1. Interoperability trumps patent</h3>
 
 <p>During the software patent debate in the European Union there was
   consensus among SME, Free Software and big businesses
@@ -543,7 +546,7 @@ order to preserve its business."</em></quote>
   extraordinary networking effects that exist in this market, such a
   preference seems justified.</p>
 
-<h3>Update policy in SSOs</h3>
+<h3>2. Update policy in SSOs</h3>
 
 <p>Secondly, Standard Setting Organisations (SSOs) could update their
   patent policies to ensure that their standards are usable in all
@@ -563,7 +566,7 @@ order to preserve its business."</em></quote>
   to assign their copyright to the SSO. Applying appropriate similar
   measures on patents for similar reasons seems justified.</p>
 
-<h3>Provide intermediate and migration possibilities</h3>
+<h3>3. Provide intermediate and migration possibilities</h3>
 
 <p>Many patent-encumbered standards already exist, and even if WIPO
   ends up agreeing on a general interoperability preference, it will
@@ -582,7 +585,7 @@ order to preserve its business."</em></quote>
 <p>Taking this step would also realign ITU-T, ITU-R, ISO and IEC again
   with their declared Common Patent Policy.</p>
 
-<h3>Update governmental procurement guidelines</h3>
+<h3>4. Update governmental procurement guidelines</h3>
 
 <p>Governments and Inter-Governmental Organisations should update
   their procurement guidelines to procure only products based upon
@@ -594,7 +597,7 @@ order to preserve its business."</em></quote>
 
 <hr />
 
-<p class="indent"><em>DISCLAIMER: This paper was written from the
+<p><em>DISCLAIMER: This paper was written from the
     perspective of an expert in the field of software. The conclusions
     may apply in their entirety, partially, or not at all to areas
     other than software.