Simon Phipps
We have @carlmalamud to thank for making the European Commission admit that harmonised standards form part of the public law. Now we need to make sure everyone can legally comply without paying royalties to the companies who write the standards.
https://the.webm.ink/patents-and-the-presumption-of-conformity
RevK :verified_r:
@webmink @carlmalamud Is this like when UK did a no smoking law, that required signage, that had to be A5 size minimum, where A5 was (in the legislation) a reference to British Standard, that cost money to obtain and hence comply? Notably A5 is easy, the legally applicable tolerances, not so easy to find.
Keith Wansbrough
@webmink @carlmalamud I agree law and standards should be open, but I don't see the logic that it should be free to comply. Compliance with the law typically involves plenty of expenses (equipment, tools, materials, time); what distinguishes patents from these? We need to clarify this otherwise the argument doesn't work.
D Ingram
@carlmalamud That would be awesome, and hopefully the CENELEC versions of IEC & CISPR standards are treated the same. I do wonder how ETSI and ITU standards came to be free when everything else is a cash grab (and it's not like IEC or IEEE pay people that contribute to developing standards, and I've done work for both).
Simon Phipps
@ingram
The difference is ETSI is a private members club so is paid for by their membership fees and does not need to paywall their publications.
@carlmalamud
D Ingram
@carlmalamud I can believe they'd fight tooth and nail. If industry is developing standards (e.g. communications and power) then there's less need for 100% free access, but for things that are legal requirements the governments that mandate them should cough up the development cost. I think that international harmonization & adoption of ISO and IEC standards makes that impossible. But for locally developed ones there's no excuse.
Carl Malamud
@ingram The EU Court of Justice, with a constitutional bench of 15 judges ruling unanimously, ruled that an ISO standard mandated by the European Commission was part of EU law and it was of “overriding public importance” that they be made available. So, I’m hopeful.
Carl Malamud
@ingram I think they put that place in early 2016 when they changed their policy. They even sent me the Adobe Indesign master files for the code! I sent a nice note to the director and he responded with an equally nice note.
D Ingram
@carlmalamud It's nice not having to jump through hoops to get the NCC now. I think I was first looking at it in 2015 for reno (to keep builder honest). I'll keep badgering Aus Gov when I get the chance to follow NZ's lead and make the standards referred to in legislation available for free. Building sector would be a start, but also an issue for radiocommunications (my area).
Carl Malamud
@ingram working on it. :) you would be amazed at how hard the standards bodies are fighting this despite strong pronouncements from the courts at the very highest levels.
D Ingram
@carlmalamud @webmink The building code in Australia is open (better than some places), but the standards that it refers to are not. For example, waterproofing in bathrooms is detailed in AS 3740. The National Construction Code gives legal force to the standards.
Carl Malamud
@ingram @webmink One step at a time. Doing the best we can. :) Australia threatened to sue us over the building codes when we first put it up, so I was really happy when they made it available. https://law.resource.org/rfcs/gov.au.20130207.pdf Here was our answer: https://law.resource.org/rfcs/gov.abcb.20130210.pdf
D Ingram
@carlmalamud I didn't know that. I've always grabbed the BC/NCC from the ACAB website and never had to pay for it (did require an account though). Queensland's working around it by pretty much capturing standards in the Development Code, e.g. for pool fencing where MP3.4 clones AS 1926.x https://www.qld.gov.au/housing/buying-owning-home/pool-safety/pool-laws-and-standards/fences-and-barriers
Carl Malamud
@ingram @webmink Australian government opened up their building code. Did a very nice job.
D Ingram
@webmink @carlmalamud Time for EU to require all standards bodies to make standards available for no cost. ETSI does. Internationally the ITU does too, so telecoms have it sorted. The rest are a mess.
New Zealand Government is the only one I know that makes many (but not all due to joint AS/NZS} NZ standards referred to in its building code available. https://www.standards.govt.nz/get-standards/sponsored-standards/building-related-standards
Carl Malamud
@kw217 @webmink The core issue is you can’t do open source software sitting on top of a patent-encumbered standard. It’s a brake on innovation, and in the case of public safety standards (which should be very widely implemented) it is a brake on safety. $0.02, understood not everybody agrees.
GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.