Non-Standards Track Documents at OASIS Comment

Dear OASIS Board members, 

I am writing this message to you as a member of 
several OASIS Technical Committees and as the primary representative of an OASIS 
member company.

OASIS has recently adopted the concept of 
non-standards track documents. The TC process states:

“Non-Standards Track Work Products are intended 
to be informative and explanatory in nature. They are not subject to the patent 
licensing and non-assertion obligations requirements of the OASIS IPR 
Policy.”

http://oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/tc-process#definitions

The addition of a concept of non-standards track 
work products is useful and the intent is well-appreciated. These products can 
help promote adoption and use of a standard, and being able to produce such 
documents within OASIS increases the value of an OASIS membership. The statement 
that the patent licensing and non-assertion obligations do not apply to these 
documents seems to make sense, as the nature and purpose of these documents is 
typically to not define any new technical functionality. 

Unfortunately, the TC process has the following 
additional requirements in the section (9) Restrictions and Disclaimers.

The cover page of a Non-Standards Track Work 
Product must clearly and conspicuously state that the patent provisions of the 
IPR Policy do not apply to that Non-Standards Track Work Product. [..] Documents 
which use formats that support headers and footers should indicate on every page 
whether the document is a Standards Track Work Product or Non-Standards Track 
Work Product. In these cases, every Non-Standards Track Work Product must also 
have a brief statement on every page that the patent provisions of the IPR 
Policy do not apply.

http://oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/tc-process#specQuality 

Here are some questions:

Does the exclusion of non-standards track 
documents from the IPR policy mean that e.g. a TC operating in RF Mode cannot 
assert that any non-standards track work product that it produces is also RF? Is 
there an intention to allow e.g. RF Mode TCs to produce RAND non-standards track 
documents? If yes, is there any indication from any TC in OASIS that any of them 
want this option? It would seem to be simpler to have a single IPR mode for all 
work products of a TC (covering both tracks), or perhaps even to require all 
non-standards track work products from any TC to use the least limiting of all 
OASIS IPR modes (allowing all TCs to produce RF good practice for standards, 
which themselves may or may not be RF). Why isn't one of these simpler options 
adopted? 

Furthermore, why is it that this indication has to 
be included on every page? Is it not enough to have it once in a 
“clear and conspicuous” place? If it is 
so important to draw the attention of readers to it, I can imagine other areas 
where warnings are equally or more relevant. (E.g. it might make much more sense 
to warn readers of a specification from a RAND TC that they specification they 
are reading is not from an RF Mode TC). What is it that singles out this 
particular area? The consequence of 
this requirement is that the OASIS templates that TC Admin offers for this 
category have more reminders about IPR policy and patent provisions than there 
are pages in the document. In the templates, 
these IPR reminders come across as health warnings on cigarette packages: 
the proliferation of warnings and legalisms in these templates (reflecting the 
OASIS policies that they correctly implement) will scare and put off the 
audience that TCs want to reach out 
to. 

My request to the OASIS Board is therefore to 
change the OASIS processes to allow TCs to produce Non-Standards documents that 
support users of standards and increase adoption of OASIS standards and that do 
not raise unnecessary IPR concerns. In its present form, the implementation of 
the concept of Non-Standards Track documents is a major disappointment for any 
TC that had hoped to be able to produce documents of this type within OASIS. 
This implementation will 
also reinforce the perception among critics that OASIS is becoming 
overly bureaucratic, and increasingly more so than similar 
organizations. Having seen what a Non-Standards Track Work Product 
will have to look like under current 
rules, I personally doubt any TC in OASIS will want to produce any product in 
this track. 

Respectfully submitted,

Pim van der Eijk
Sonnenglanz Consulting 

Copies: Laurent Liscia, OASIS TAB, OASIS TC 
Admin.