2nd ITU-T-Forum Summit – San Francisco - July’032nd ITU-T-Forum Summit – San Francisco - July’03

ITU-T Forum ITU-T Forum Summit 2003Summit 2003

2nd ITU-T-Forum Summit – San Francisco - July’032nd ITU-T-Forum Summit – San Francisco - July’03

IPR and StandardizationIPR and StandardizationIMTC ViewpointIMTC Viewpoint

Dr. Istvan Sebestyen

IMTC President

2nd ITU-T-Forum Summit Meeting – July 2003 – San Francisco, CA, USA

OutlineOutline

• Anything wrong with the current IPR policies of SDOs?

• IMTC’s IPR-related activities:– Setting IPR requirements– Promotion of licensing– IMTC’s IPR relevant “Historical Archive”

• Conclusions

2nd ITU-T-Forum Summit Meeting – July 2003 – San Francisco, CA, USA

Standardization Faces a CrisisStandardization Faces a Crisis

• Many modern standards face a very complex IPR “environment”– Many claimants, unclear situations– Licensing difficulties delay market

deployment (4 years+)

• Major approved standards have problems

• Many are questioning survival of the standardization process

2nd ITU-T-Forum Summit Meeting – July 2003 – San Francisco, CA, USA

Market Acceptance is Becoming Market Acceptance is Becoming a Real Problema Real Problem

• Standards are not working anymore– Too many claimed IPR holders (sometimes 50)– Lots of valid IPR, hard to determine owners– Often too expensive – Unrealistic licensing schemes – Impossible to get all licenses (too many IP holders)

• Total cost is unpredictable– IPR “raiders” (weak or invalid claims) try to exploit

the chaos

• Consequence: Market movement toward proprietary solutions

2nd ITU-T-Forum Summit Meeting – July 2003 – San Francisco, CA, USA

Increasing Dangerous TrendIncreasing Dangerous Trend• Many in industry are questioning if

standardization is still practical– A perception of breakdown in the process

• Examples– ISO/IEC MPEG-1, MPEG-2, MPEG-4 – ITU-T G.723.1, G.729 speech codecs– ITU-T H.261, H.263 video codecs– ITU-T T.81 | ISO/IEC 10914 “JPEG-1” – ITU-T H.264 | MPEG4-10 (JVT) – hopefully not…

2nd ITU-T-Forum Summit Meeting – July 2003 – San Francisco, CA, USA

Something wrong with theSomething wrong with theSDO SDO IPR IPR PoliciesPolicies??

• Fundamental assumptions of the “classical” IPR policies are shaking

• Including:– “One size fits all” policy works for all standards

– All SDOs must have similar/same policies

– Technical and IPR work must be separated

– Licensing strictly outside the scope of SDO

– Voluntary “gentleman” like behaviour of actors assumed, no “Standards Police” needed

2nd ITU-T-Forum Summit Meeting – July 2003 – San Francisco, CA, USA

Traditional SDO Policies InadequateTraditional SDO Policies Inadequate

• Traditional IPR policy doesn’t work for very complex IPR situations– One policy doesn’t fit all standards– Different SDOs can have different policies– Technical and IPR work may be merged

• May have to check IP claims, react technically

– Licensing can be within scope of SDO• Sometimes necessary in complex IPR situations

2nd ITU-T-Forum Summit Meeting – July 2003 – San Francisco, CA, USA

Implementation and RecordkeepingImplementation and Recordkeeping

• Voluntary implementation inadequate– SDO Secretariat may need to take actions

• Recordkeeping, Archiving Improvements– Must keep ALL records for future research

• Not just a subset

– Must keep permanently to prove prior art– Good indexes, searchable text will help

2nd ITU-T-Forum Summit Meeting – July 2003 – San Francisco, CA, USA

What is the solution?What is the solution?

• Improve SDO IPR policies– Meet market requirements for standardization– Deregulation, “open source” mean changes

• Users have many choices – SDOs must compete

• If standards fail, participation will disappear

• Only SDOs with successful IP policies will survive

• Necessary, but a difficult challenge!

• Affected fora can assist in some areas

2nd ITU-T-Forum Summit Meeting – July 2003 – San Francisco, CA, USA

What IMTC is DoingWhat IMTC is Doing• At the start of standardization

– Formulate and communicate IPR requirements to SDOs

• At the end of standardization– Initiate and sponsor the start of licensing

activities, if needed

• Collect & store relevant IPR records– “Historical information” on multimedia

standards to assist solution of IPR disputes

2nd ITU-T-Forum Summit Meeting – July 2003 – San Francisco, CA, USA

Formulation of IPR RequirementsFormulation of IPR Requirements• Best example: ITU-T H.264 | MPEG-4 Part10

– IMTC formulated and liaised requirements to ITU-T and ISO/IEC MPEG

• RF “Baseline” – for fast market breakthrough in real-time communication

• RAND “Options“ – e.g. for Digital TV

– Concept was accepted both by ITU and ISO/IEC

• Problem: SDOs do not have appropriate policy “tools” and practice to ensure “RF Baseline” implementation (“keep your finger crossed”)

2nd ITU-T-Forum Summit Meeting – July 2003 – San Francisco, CA, USA

Formulation of IPR Requirements (2)Formulation of IPR Requirements (2)

• IMTC takes member input case-by-case

• IMTC may “steer” particular standards to the SDO whose IPR policy fits best

• IMTC may suggest a de-facto standard

• IMTC may define own standard– As a last resort only

2nd ITU-T-Forum Summit Meeting – July 2003 – San Francisco, CA, USA

Kick-off of LicensingKick-off of Licensing

• Promote the start of licensing activities– Allow fast implementation and market

penetration of the standard

• Best example ITU-T H.264:– IMTC/M4IF/ISMA jointly sponsored a

June 2003 meeting (Los Angeles) • Formulate the licensing requirements as seen by

the users.

– Next step: Licensors getting together…

2nd ITU-T-Forum Summit Meeting – July 2003 – San Francisco, CA, USA

„„Historic Historic ArchiveArchive““ Goals Goals• Central source for prior art and relevant

records for IMTC members• Discourage filing of invalid patents• Clarify situation for standards committees• Support defense against invalid patents• Promote adoption of new technology• Promote growth of IMTC member markets

2nd ITU-T-Forum Summit Meeting – July 2003 – San Francisco, CA, USA

Don’t Standards Bodies already Don’t Standards Bodies already do this?do this?

• Standards Orgs. often don’t keep records

• Their records are not kept forever

• Some documents are not archived at all– (ITU-T Rapporteurs meeting docs, TDs,

Delayed docs)

• Many older records on paper only– Especially prior to 1995

2nd ITU-T-Forum Summit Meeting – July 2003 – San Francisco, CA, USA

ConclusionsConclusions

• Traditional IPR policies not working– Very complex IPR environments– Market rejecting delays, complexity– SDOs, standardization at risk

• Improved policies needed ASAP

• Fora such as IMTC can help the situation– Advice, choice of SDOs– Historical archive projects

2nd ITU-T-Forum Summit Meeting – July 2003 – San Francisco, CA, USA

Thank you!Thank you!

Questions?

2nd ITU-T-Forum Summit – San Francisco - July’032nd ITU-T-Forum Summit – San Francisco - July’03

Background slides on the IMTC‘s Background slides on the IMTC‘s „Historical Archive“„Historical Archive“

2nd ITU-T-Forum Summit Meeting – July 2003 – San Francisco, CA, USA

““Historical” Standards ArchiveHistorical” Standards Archive

• Historical information relevant to multimedia technology & standards

• Contents include:– ITU-T H.3xx Systems– MPEG Systems – H.26x; G.72x; T.xx (media codecs)– Other relevant standards

• Already running with partial database

2nd ITU-T-Forum Summit Meeting – July 2003 – San Francisco, CA, USA

Electronic Access Electronic Access (members only)(members only)

• All archives will be in electronic form

• Older paper documents will be scanned

• Available via Web/FTP• CDs, DVDs if possible

2nd ITU-T-Forum Summit Meeting – July 2003 – San Francisco, CA, USA

Data SourcesData Sources• Existing databases

• IMTC member records

• Standards Org. records

• References to existing information

2nd ITU-T-Forum Summit Meeting – July 2003 – San Francisco, CA, USA

What will be Stored?What will be Stored?• All meeting contributions• All meeting reports• Lists of participants• Records of IPR licensing declarations• Copies of available pre-existing records• Copies of Standards Org. patent databases• Journal articles, brochures, conference procs.• References to books, expired patents, etc.