<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: China drafts all-out national standards IPR policy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?feed=rss2&#038;p=819" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=819</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2010 05:00:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Ray Alderman</title>
		<link>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=819&#038;cpage=1#comment-1808</link>
		<dc:creator>Ray Alderman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 22:01:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=819#comment-1808</guid>
		<description>We at VITA put mandatory ex ante disclosure of all patents associated with our standards in place three years ago (we are an ANSI standards developer, and we had to fight like hell to get it through ANSI). We have experienced seven patent disclosures of fees and royalties, with complete contracts submitted of all conditions for licensing. The IEEE put voluntary ex ante disclosure in place about the same time. To my knowledge, they have experienced ZERO disclosures....and a pile of patent  issues and ambushes affecting their members. The EU is playing games with IPR and ex ante disclosure...and with their SDOs. I am happy to see the Chinese follow VITA&#039;s lead in making mandatory ex ante patent disclosure in all standards meetings the law of the land. Soon, both the EU/DG-Comp and ANSI will have to swallow hard and adopt mandatory ex ante patent policies. It is the only policy that works to the benefit of society and upholds an SDO&#039;s fiduciary duty to its members and to the public. Anything less from the EU and ANSI is simply &quot;game playing&quot;, the same thing the IP holders are presently doing in the standards meetings.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We at VITA put mandatory ex ante disclosure of all patents associated with our standards in place three years ago (we are an ANSI standards developer, and we had to fight like hell to get it through ANSI). We have experienced seven patent disclosures of fees and royalties, with complete contracts submitted of all conditions for licensing. The IEEE put voluntary ex ante disclosure in place about the same time. To my knowledge, they have experienced ZERO disclosures&#8230;.and a pile of patent  issues and ambushes affecting their members. The EU is playing games with IPR and ex ante disclosure&#8230;and with their SDOs. I am happy to see the Chinese follow VITA&#8217;s lead in making mandatory ex ante patent disclosure in all standards meetings the law of the land. Soon, both the EU/DG-Comp and ANSI will have to swallow hard and adopt mandatory ex ante patent policies. It is the only policy that works to the benefit of society and upholds an SDO&#8217;s fiduciary duty to its members and to the public. Anything less from the EU and ANSI is simply &#8220;game playing&#8221;, the same thing the IP holders are presently doing in the standards meetings.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
