X-Git-Url: http://pere.pagekite.me/gitweb/homepage.git/blobdiff_plain/680c0c23d0a81aac66dd87cf6baf93153ce728e7..bd2a68a6f70ddf8c244e27d5aa6fa5a7f1793cbb:/blog/archive/2010/12/index.html diff --git a/blog/archive/2010/12/index.html b/blog/archive/2010/12/index.html index 23a94e5a12..17cc79b140 100644 --- a/blog/archive/2010/12/index.html +++ b/blog/archive/2010/12/index.html @@ -480,7 +480,7 @@ kontakt slik at jeg kan få med også disse.

- Tags: norsk, personvern. + Tags: norsk, personvern, surveillance. @@ -733,6 +733,464 @@ Congressman of the Republic of Perú.

+ Tags: english, standard. + + + +
+ +
+
+ Is Ogg Theora a free and open standard? +
+
+ 2010-12-25 20:25 +
+ +
+ +

The +Digistan definition of a free and open standard reads like this:

+ +
+ +

The Digital Standards Organization defines free and open standard +as follows:

+ +
    + +
  1. A free and open standard is immune to vendor capture at all stages +in its life-cycle. Immunity from vendor capture makes it possible to +freely use, improve upon, trust, and extend a standard over time.
    2. + +
  2. The standard is adopted and will be maintained by a not-for-profit +organisation, and its ongoing development occurs on the basis of an +open decision-making procedure available to all interested +parties.
    3. + +
  3. The standard has been published and the standard specification +document is available freely. It must be permissible to all to copy, +distribute, and use it freely.
    4. + +
  4. The patents possibly present on (parts of) the standard are made +irrevocably available on a royalty-free basis.
    5. + +
  5. There are no constraints on the re-use of the standard.
    6. + +
+ +

The economic outcome of a free and open standard, which can be +measured, is that it enables perfect competition between suppliers of +products based on the standard.

+
+ +

For a while now I have tried to figure out of Ogg Theora is a free +and open standard according to this definition. Here is a short +writeup of what I have been able to gather so far. I brought up the +topic on the Xiph advocacy mailing list +in +July 2009, for those that want to see some background information. +According to Ivo Emanuel Gonçalves and Monty Montgomery on that list +the Ogg Theora specification fulfils the Digistan definition.

+ +

Free from vendor capture?

+ +

As far as I can see, there is no single vendor that can control the +Ogg Theora specification. It can be argued that the +Xiph foundation is such vendor, but +given that it is a non-profit foundation with the expressed goal +making free and open protocols and standards available, it is not +obvious that this is a real risk. One issue with the Xiph +foundation is that its inner working (as in board member list, or who +control the foundation) are not easily available on the web. I've +been unable to find out who is in the foundation board, and have not +seen any accounting information documenting how money is handled nor +where is is spent in the foundation. It is thus not obvious for an +external observer who control The Xiph foundation, and for all I know +it is possible for a single vendor to take control over the +specification. But it seem unlikely.

+ +

Maintained by open not-for-profit organisation?

+ +

Assuming that the Xiph foundation is the organisation its web pages +claim it to be, this point is fulfilled. If Xiph foundation is +controlled by a single vendor, it isn't, but I have not found any +documentation indicating this.

+ +

According to +a report +prepared by Audun Vaaler og Børre Ludvigsen for the Norwegian +government, the Xiph foundation is a non-commercial organisation and +the development process is open, transparent and non-Discrimatory. +Until proven otherwise, I believe it make most sense to believe the +report is correct.

+ +

Specification freely available?

+ +

The specification for the Ogg +container format and both the +Vorbis and +Theora codeces are available on +the web. This are the terms in the Vorbis and Theora specification: + +

+ +Anyone may freely use and distribute the Ogg and [Vorbis/Theora] +specifications, whether in private, public, or corporate +capacity. However, the Xiph.Org Foundation and the Ogg project reserve +the right to set the Ogg [Vorbis/Theora] specification and certify +specification compliance. + +
+ +

The Ogg container format is specified in IETF +RFC 3533, and +this is the term:

+ +

+ +

This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to +others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it +or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and +distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, +provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are +included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this +document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing +the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other +Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of developing +Internet standards in which case the procedures for copyrights defined +in the Internet Standards process must be followed, or as required to +translate it into languages other than English.

+ +

The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be +revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.

+
+ +

All these terms seem to allow unlimited distribution and use, an +this term seem to be fulfilled. There might be a problem with the +missing permission to distribute modified versions of the text, and +thus reuse it in other specifications. Not quite sure if that is a +requirement for the Digistan definition.

+ +

Royalty-free?

+ +

There are no known patent claims requiring royalties for the Ogg +Theora format. +MPEG-LA +and +Steve +Jobs in Apple claim to know about some patent claims (submarine +patents) against the Theora format, but no-one else seem to believe +them. Both Opera Software and the Mozilla Foundation have looked into +this and decided to implement Ogg Theora support in their browsers +without paying any royalties. For now the claims from MPEG-LA and +Steve Jobs seem more like FUD to scare people to use the H.264 codec +than any real problem with Ogg Theora.

+ +

No constraints on re-use?

+ +

I am not aware of any constraints on re-use.

+ +

Conclusion

+ +

3 of 5 requirements seem obviously fulfilled, and the remaining 2 +depend on the governing structure of the Xiph foundation. Given the +background report used by the Norwegian government, I believe it is +safe to assume the last two requirements are fulfilled too, but it +would be nice if the Xiph foundation web site made it easier to verify +this.

+ +

It would be nice to see other analysis of other specifications to +see if they are free and open standards.

+ +
+
+ + + + Tags: english, standard, video. + +
+
+
+ +
+
+ The many definitions of a open standard +
+
+ 2010-12-27 14:45 +
+ +
+ +

One of the reasons I like the Digistan definition of +"Free and +Open Standard" is that this is a new term, and thus the meaning of +the term has been decided by Digistan. The term "Open Standard" has +become so misunderstood that it is no longer very useful when talking +about standards. One end up discussing which definition is the best +one and with such frame the only one gaining are the proponents of +de-facto standards and proprietary solutions.

+ +

But to give us an idea about the diversity of definitions of open +standards, here are a few that I know about. This list is not +complete, but can be a starting point for those that want to do a +complete survey. More definitions are available on the +wikipedia +page.

+ +

First off is my favourite, the definition from the European +Interoperability Framework version 1.0. Really sad to notice that BSA +and others has succeeded in getting it removed from version 2.0 of the +framework by stacking the committee drafting the new version with +their own people. Anyway, the definition is still available and it +include the key properties needed to make sure everyone can use a +specification on equal terms.

+ +
+ +

The following are the minimal characteristics that a specification +and its attendant documents must have in order to be considered an +open standard:

+ +
    + +
  • The standard is adopted and will be maintained by a not-for-profit +organisation, and its ongoing development occurs on the basis of an +open decision-making procedure available to all interested parties +(consensus or majority decision etc.).
    • + +
  • The standard has been published and the standard specification +document is available either freely or at a nominal charge. It must be +permissible to all to copy, distribute and use it for no fee or at a +nominal fee.
    • + +
  • The intellectual property - i.e. patents possibly present - of +(parts of) the standard is made irrevocably available on a royalty- +free basis.
    • + +
  • There are no constraints on the re-use of the standard.
    • + +
+
+ +

Another one originates from my friends over at +DKUUG, who coined and gathered +support for this +definition in 2004. It even made it into the Danish parlament as +their +definition of a open standard. Another from a different part of +the Danish government is available from the wikipedia page.

+ +
+ +

En åben standard opfylder følgende krav:

+ +
    + +
  1. Veldokumenteret med den fuldstændige specifikation offentligt +tilgængelig.
    2. + +
  2. Frit implementerbar uden økonomiske, politiske eller juridiske +begrænsninger på implementation og anvendelse.
    3. + +
  3. Standardiseret og vedligeholdt i et åbent forum (en såkaldt +"standardiseringsorganisation") via en åben proces.
    4. + +
+ +
+ +

Then there is the +definition from Free Software Foundation Europe.

+ +
+ +

An Open Standard refers to a format or protocol that is

+ +
    + +
  1. subject to full public assessment and use without constraints in a +manner equally available to all parties;
    2. + +
  2. without any components or extensions that have dependencies on +formats or protocols that do not meet the definition of an Open +Standard themselves;
    3. + +
  3. free from legal or technical clauses that limit its utilisation by +any party or in any business model;
    4. + +
  4. managed and further developed independently of any single vendor +in a process open to the equal participation of competitors and third +parties;
    5. + +
  5. available in multiple complete implementations by competing +vendors, or as a complete implementation equally available to all +parties.
    6. + +
+ +
+ +

A long time ago, SUN Microsystems, now bought by Oracle, created +its +Open +Standards Checklist with a fairly detailed description.

+ +
+

Creation and Management of an Open Standard + +

    + +
  • Its development and management process must be collaborative and + democratic: + +
      + +
    • Participation must be accessible to all those who wish to + participate and can meet fair and reasonable criteria + imposed by the organization under which it is developed + and managed.
      • + +
    • The processes must be documented and, through a known + method, can be changed through input from all + participants.
      • + +
    • The process must be based on formal and binding commitments for + the disclosure and licensing of intellectual property rights.
      • + +
    • Development and management should strive for consensus, + and an appeals process must be clearly outlined.
      • + +
    • The standard specification must be open to extensive + public review at least once in its life-cycle, with + comments duly discussed and acted upon, if required.
      • + +
    + +
    • + +
+ +

Use and Licensing of an Open Standard

+
    + +
  • The standard must describe an interface, not an implementation, + and the industry must be capable of creating multiple, competing + implementations to the interface described in the standard without + undue or restrictive constraints. Interfaces include APIs, + protocols, schemas, data formats and their encoding.
    • + +
  • The standard must not contain any proprietary "hooks" that create + a technical or economic barriers
    • + +
  • Faithful implementations of the standard must + interoperate. Interoperability means the ability of a computer + program to communicate and exchange information with other computer + programs and mutually to use the information which has been + exchanged. This includes the ability to use, convert, or exchange + file formats, protocols, schemas, interface information or + conventions, so as to permit the computer program to work with other + computer programs and users in all the ways in which they are + intended to function.
    • + +
  • It must be permissible for anyone to copy, distribute and read the + standard for a nominal fee, or even no fee. If there is a fee, it + must be low enough to not preclude widespread use.
    • + +
  • It must be possible for anyone to obtain free (no royalties or + fees; also known as "royalty free"), worldwide, non-exclusive and + perpetual licenses to all essential patent claims to make, use and + sell products based on the standard. The only exceptions are + terminations per the reciprocity and defensive suspension terms + outlined below. Essential patent claims include pending, unpublished + patents, published patents, and patent applications. The license is + only for the exact scope of the standard in question. + +
      + +
    • May be conditioned only on reciprocal licenses to any of + licensees' patent claims essential to practice that standard + (also known as a reciprocity clause)
      • + +
    • May be terminated as to any licensee who sues the licensor + or any other licensee for infringement of patent claims + essential to practice that standard (also known as a + "defensive suspension" clause)
      • + +
    • The same licensing terms are available to every potential + licensor
      • + +
    +
    • + +
  • The licensing terms of an open standards must not preclude + implementations of that standard under open source licensing terms + or restricted licensing terms
    • + +
+ +
+ +

It is said that one of the nice things about standards is that +there are so many of them. As you can see, the same holds true for +open standard definitions. Most of the definitions have a lot in +common, and it is not really controversial what properties a open +standard should have, but the diversity of definitions have made it +possible for those that want to avoid a level marked field and real +competition to downplay the significance of open standards. I hope we +can turn this tide by focusing on the advantages of Free and Open +Standards.

+ +
+
+ + + + Tags: english, standard. + +
+
+
+ +
+
+ What standards are Free and Open as defined by Digistan? +
+
+ 2010-12-30 23:15 +
+ +
+ +

After trying to +compare +Ogg Theora to +the Digistan +definition of a free and open standard, I concluded that this need +to be done for more standards and started on a framework for doing +this. As a start, I want to get the status for all the standards in +the Norwegian reference directory, which include UTF-8, HTML, PDF, ODF, +JPEG, PNG, SVG and others. But to be able to complete this in a +reasonable time frame, I will need help.

+ +

If you want to help out with this work, please visit +the +wiki pages I have set up for this, and let me know that you want +to help out. The IRC channel #nuug on irc.freenode.net is a good +place to coordinate this for now, as it is the IRC channel for the +NUUG association where I have created the framework (I am the leader +of the Norwegian Unix User Group).

+ +

The framework is still forming, and a lot is left to do. Do not be +scared by the sketchy form of the current pages. :)

+ +
+
+ + + Tags: english, standard.
@@ -748,6 +1206,13 @@ Congressman of the Republic of Perú.

Archive