[odf-discuss] factors for the MOOXML NBs to consider

[Russell Ossendryver]

Hi

This can help us with the article:

http://www.standardsinfo.net/info/livelink/fetch/2000/148478/6301438/inttrade.html

On Jan 14, 2008 9:51 PM, marbux <marbux at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Jan 14, 2008 6:24 PM, Christian Einfeldt <einfeldt at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > This is very serious news for any National Board weighing whether to
> > adopt MOOXML as a standard at the NBM in Geneva in late Feb.  How could any
> > NB possibly consider adopting a "standard" that is the subject of an
> > anti-trust inquiry?
> >
> > http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/01/14/1719237
> >
> > World Trade Organization Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade:
>
> Decision
>
> The following principles and procedures should be observed, when
> international standards, guides and recommendations (as mentioned under
> Articles 2, 5 and Annex 3 of the TBT Agreement for the preparation of
> mandatory technical regulations, conformity assessment procedures and
> voluntary standards) are elaborated, to ensure transparency, openness,
> impartiality and consensus, effectiveness and relevance, coherence, and to
> address the concerns of developing countries.
>
> ...
>
> 10. In order to serve the interests of the WTO membership in facilitating
> international trade and preventing unnecessary trade barriers, international
> standards need to be relevant and to *effectively respond to regulatory* and
> market *needs*, as well as scientific and technological developments in
> various countries. *They should not distort the global market, have
> adverse effects on fair competition*, or stifle innovation and
> technological development. In addition, they should not give preference to
> the characteristics or requirements of specific countries or regions when
> different needs or interests exist in other countries or regions. ...
>
> 11. Accordingly, it is important that international standardizing bodies:
>
>    - Take account of relevant* regulatory *or market *needs*, *as
>    feasible and appropriate*, as well as scientific and technological
>    developments in the elaboration of standards; ...
>
>
> Decisions and Recommendations Adopted by the Committee Since 1 January
> 1995 (May 23, 2002), <http://docsonline.wto.org/imrd/directdoc.asp?DDFDocuments/t/G/TBT/1R8.doc
> >
>
> The reference to "regulatory needs" is most likely a reference to
> antitrust and other fair competition law, from which the relevant  portions
> of the TBT were originally drawn. However, it could also be read as
> referring to the WTO dispute resolution process, or to both.
>
> The prohibition against anti-competitive effects in standards is a
> restatement of TBT Article 2 section 2.2, which provides in relevant part:
>
> Members shall ensure that technical regulations are not *prepared, adopted
> * or applied with a view to or *with the effect of* creating unnecessary
> obstacles to international trade. ...
>
> Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (annotated version), <http://www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/analytic_index_e/tbt_01_e.htm#article2>.
>
>
> There is enormous overlapping jurisdiction between national
> standardization body responsibilities and those of antitrust regulators.
> There is a pretty fair argument that JTC 1 should put DIS-29500 on ice until
> the antitrust proceeding is concluded, in order to avoid the possibility of
> inconsistent decisions. The NBs are actually required by the TBT to consider
> the potential anticompetitive effects of draft standards, but that
> requirement is routinely ignored.
>
> Today's action by DG Competition may also impact the pending decision in
> U.S. v. Microsoft whether to lift the injunction. It requires, inter alia,
> that Microsoft disclose the APIs for Microsoft Office so that competitors
> apps' may interoperate. So I wouldn't be surprised to see the state
> attorneys general raising this issue.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Marbux
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> odf-discuss mailing list
> odf-discuss at opendocumentfellowship.com
> http://lists.opendocumentfellowship.com/mailman/listinfo/odf-discuss
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.opendocumentfellowship.com/pipermail/odf-discuss/attachments/20080115/828a1334/attachment-0001.html