Standards aren’t as boring as they seem. Actually standards are mostly fun, humorous, at times idiosyncratic. For instance, that image made me laugh out loud. When you attend a mediocre standard policy conference where the speaker has nothing to say, he will start to talk about the electric plugs. Here we find George Willingmyre in that pose, an article where the lobbyist muses about the alleged advantages of RAND models. The plug smells tobacco. When a problem is denied, there is:
What is the problem? Is this actually a “problem” or a matter of differing goals? What is the lesson? Is it possible that the real problem is the market distortion that could occur when advocates from one side promote government intervention to their advantage…?
Oh, my… Apparently the lobbyist is paid per word count:
…we speak of “RAND standards development patent policies” that provide for “Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory” (RAND)… licensing terms and conditions (including possible royalties) that might comprise a license covered by an assurance of a license from the holder of an essential patent to a particular standard.
So what’s the problem that isn’t?
Some.. contend they are disadvantaged by RAND standards development patent polices where patent owners are allowed to seek reasonable royalties (and/or other reasonable terms and conditions) in licensing patents that are essential to practice the standard.
If you want to listen to plain beautiful RAND snake talk from a real professional take this mp3 recording (Allen Dixon @ Talkstandards).
It must be an interesting challenge to convince an audience that a private levy on a public standard was beneficial.