3 ms·

Standards-setting bodies typically address this today through the use of standard-essential-patent policies. IEEE, for example, requires assurance from such pat

Standards-setting bodies typically address this today through the use of standard-essential-patent policies. IEEE, for example, requires assurance from such patent holders that they will either not enforce the patent against those implementing the standard, will grant a license free of charge, or will grant a license "under reasonable rates." https://standards.ieee.org/develop/policies/bylaws/approved-changes.pdf https://standards.ieee.org/develop/policies/bylaws/approved-... Not sure why improving this state of affairs would require a change in underlying patent laws. We just need standards bodies to adopt more general patent policies--which could be accomplished by preferring to use standards from orgs with better patent policies.

frenchy 10y ago
> Not sure why improving this state of affairs would require a change in underlying patent laws. The problem with this is that there will always be someone who will happily say "Sure, I'll call your patent a 'standard' if you give me a little bit of money to 'certify' it."
- throwawaykf05 10y ago
  Actually the problem these days is that standard-essential patents are considered less valuable because they tend to require FRAND licensing. This is the problem companies like Motorola and Samsung ran into during the smartphone patent wars. They could not ask for injunctions or high royalties for many of their patents as they were standards-essential, and they lost a lot of leverage. Secondly, standards setting bodies are usually a conglomerate of members from competing companies and hence a huge political bureaucratic mess, so it's not as easy to get something into the standard just for some money.
- pdabbadabba 10y ago
  Maybe. But then there's the little matter of adoption. The fact that some body or other called a patent technology a "standard" is meaningless, and not especially problematic. The problem comes when this standard actually comes into widespread use.

frenchy 10y ago

> Not sure why improving this state of affairs would require a change in underlying patent laws. The problem with this is that there will always be someone who will happily say "Sure, I'll call your patent a 'standard' if you give me a little bit of money to 'certify' it."

throwawaykf05 10y ago
Actually the problem these days is that standard-essential patents are considered less valuable because they tend to require FRAND licensing. This is the problem companies like Motorola and Samsung ran into during the smartphone patent wars. They could not ask for injunctions or high royalties for many of their patents as they were standards-essential, and they lost a lot of leverage. Secondly, standards setting bodies are usually a conglomerate of members from competing companies and hence a huge political bureaucratic mess, so it's not as easy to get something into the standard just for some money.
pdabbadabba 10y ago
Maybe. But then there's the little matter of adoption. The fact that some body or other called a patent technology a "standard" is meaningless, and not especially problematic. The problem comes when this standard actually comes into widespread use.