EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

03.02.08

Assorted Web/Blog Reactions to OOXML BRM

Posted in Asia, Deception, ECMA, Europe, ISO, Microsoft, Open XML at 2:18 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Noooxml.org could not contain a bit of excitement about the outcome. Its headline was:

BRM in Geneva is over: big failure for OOXML

Only ten national delegations voted, and only 4 P-members were for approval. 4 P-members disapproved, a whopping 15 abstained, and 2 even refused to register a vote in protest.

If you count all voting delegates, including those who are not P members, the vote was 6 approvals, 4 disapprovals, 18 abstentions and 4 refusals to vote. Expect this to be announced by Microsoft as a “3 to 2 majority for OOXML approval” in the next few hours. The reality is of course that this is a huge setback for Microsoft. The tricks they have been trying have backfired, and it is now more clear than ever before that OOXML is an immature specification which was totally inappropriate for the fast track procedure.

Same headline echoed by Open Malaysia:

BRM in Geneva is over: big failure for OOXML

As noooxml.org points out, Microsoft will try to spin this. It is already trying to spin (it's a pattern), so here is the point to bear in mind and prepare for:

Microsoft’s New Meme: ‘Marketplace Relevance’

This seems to be preparing the ground for an eventual rejection of OOXML. The line would be well, being an official ISO standard isn’t *so* important: what matters is “marketplace relevance”. And we all know what that means: just keep that status quo rolling…

Here is the summary of an article from InfoWorld, which also appears in CIO.com.

About four-fifths of the proposed changes to a draft standard for the OOXML document format were waved through, undiscussed, at the conclusion of a weeklong meeting in Geneva.

This relates to the prophecy of Bob Sutor, which he posted in his blog several days ago.

Although a month remains for changes of heart (brace yourself for colossally heavy lobbying by Microsoft), the following post prematurely predicts failure.

The BRM meeting in Geneva is over. The plan was, from the Microsoft point of view, that OOXML should now be an ISO standard. It didn’t make it.

Noooxml.org later posted an update almost identical to ours and it’s focused on Tim Bray’s spilling of the beans.

The Canadian BRM delegate Tim Bray strongly criticised the ISO process while he doesn’t blame the BRM failure on ISO but on the vendor that used the ECMA proxy.

Tim Bray, redirecting his readers to this page, was not too happy with the headlines, possibly ours included.

The Open Malaysia blogger posts another last update which concurs with what we find in the press.

The final day was absolute mayhem. We had to submit decisions on over 500 items which we hadn’t have the time to review. All the important issues which have been worked on repeatedly happened to appear on this final day. So it was non-stop important matters. Unfortunately I was caught up in a change from Malaysia, so I must have missed deliberating on a few important matters.

Articles from the mainstream press agreed that the final day was somewhat of a mess. This BRM ought to be remembered as a disaster, as predciated all along [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]. It leaves ECMA, Microsoft and even ISO quite seriously wounded. In another Web forum, someone has begun asking if the European Commission can take action against ECMA, not just Microsoft, which is already under antitrust investigation for its abuse of ISO.

ISO standard

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

4 Comments

  1. James Williams said,

    March 2, 2008 at 2:46 am

    Gravatar

    Of course, what you’re failing to recognize here is that all of the blogs and the press that you mention are pretty much orchestrated through a select few, probably arranged during the side meetings that the OFE set up in Geneva. With IBM, part of the US delegation, and part of the Canadian delegation leading the charge.

    Starting with the US Head Of Delegation, who speaks for himself on this matter, not for the United States. Followed up by a startlingly incorrect blog post that Andy Updegrove put out – then picked up by a bunch of people who can only be described as breathing their own exhaust fumes.

    See a very brief comment from the BRM convenor, Alex Brown, posted below Andy’s terrible and inappropriate rantings.

    http://www.consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/comment.php?mode=view&cid=18785

    The rest we will know a couple of weeks from now I suspect.

    What is happening here is pretty representive of the sneeky, deceptive and underhand way that the pro-ODF crew have run things over the last few months.

    This time around thought they have gone way overboard and the deceptions can’t be hidden in the same way as they have over recent months.

  2. Roy Schestowitz said,

    March 2, 2008 at 5:06 am

    Gravatar

    Actually, the press concurs with these observations. I wouldn’t take Alex Brown’s word on this too seriously because he’s defensive. It’s his future career at stake.

    http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9065958
    http://www.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idUSN2923321820080229

    Yes, the BRM failed. If you can find articles that suggest otherwise, please share. For all I can tell, Microsoft is already spinning and changing its tune (just watch their blogs). Call it “damage control” or “fallback”.

    I remain unconvinced by your arguments, but as I wrote earlier, I expect a conferable amount of lobbying from Microsoft to come this March. Lobbying does not change a reality, but hand-overs of money, as we have recently seen, does indeed make a difference. I came to discover throughout my conversations with Stocholm, for example, that he works for a Microsoft partner.

    Microsoft can never earn ISO for OOXML. It can try to buy ISO, but trying may not be enough. Buying it is not legal (watch what Bryan said about Microsoft). Regardless of the outcome, people deserve to know this truth about this breathtaking fiasco.

    Mind you, I’ve received and come under endless personal attacks. This type of smear campaign consistently comes from pseudonymous or anonymous voices (it’s very libelous, but I cannot accuse unnamed individuals) and about 20-30 posts per day are now used against me. I can’t keep up with it, but I imagine something is behind this.

    Having raised this concern in a disucssion with a friend he told me:

    Again two tactics: name calling and amnesia

    The amnesia is interesting, because the articles and even whole magazines and web sites disappear. Microsoft astroturfers try it again and again. We saw just the other week with the developer tools question. They ignored the last 10 years and claimed that if there were any ‘alternative’ tools, why aren’t people talking about them or using them… Tricks like that often catch the unwary.

    I often wonder if Microsoft employs cranks to write from their jail cells.

    Their purpose is to drag you down to their level, if they can, and if nothing else burn up your time in name calling. They win if you write about them and their movement.

    That’s just why I rarely write about the abuse that’s directed against me (not here anyway). That helps them win.

    Whether these are the OS/2-days Munchkins, I don’t know, but their names have been the same for about 10 years and some of them were involved in smearing the names of OS/2 supporters. I’ve heard about death threats too and I get my fair share of death wishes (which I ignore).

    Have a look at the Tim Bray tale. It’s nothing new.

  3. James Williams said,

    March 7, 2008 at 2:41 am

    Gravatar

    Of course it concurs, that is what orchastrated press is supposed to do.

  4. Roy Schestowitz said,

    March 7, 2008 at 3:34 am

    Gravatar

    Have a look at Alex Brown fighting to save his dignity amidst this latest update.

    Alex Brown has updated his blog post about the voting rules at the BRM. “This was the wrong clause” he says.

    [...]

    Some questions for the audience:

    1. Which one is the “normal JTC1 procedures”?
    2. None of them mentions which majority should be taken. Simple majority of 50%, or 66% of P-members?
    3. Where is the “letter” in the letter ballot?

    Look at Alex getting grilled. He’s replying, but it’s not truly compelling. It’s like the powwow with Andy.

What Else is New


  1. The European Patent Office Comes up With a Plethora of New Buzzwords by Which to Refer to Software Patents

    The permissive attitude towards software patents in Europe is harmful to software developers in Europe; the officials, who never wrote a computer program in their entire life, pretend this is not the case by adopting marketing techniques and surrogate terms



  2. Patent Maximalists in Europe Keep Mentioning China Even Though It Barely Matters to European Patents

    EPO waves a "white flag" in the face of China even though Chinese patents do not matter much to Europe (except when the goal is to encourage low patent quality, attracting humongous patent trolls)



  3. Team UPC Has Been Reduced to Lies, Lies, and More Lies about the Unified Patent Court Agreement

    With the Unified Patent Court Agreement pretty much dead on arrival (an arrival that is never reached, either) the UPC hopefuls -- those looking to profit from lots of frivolous patent litigation in Europe -- resort to bald-faced lying



  4. Links 17/11/2018: Mesa 18.3 RC3, Total War: WARHAMMER II, GNOME 3.31.2

    Links for the day



  5. Links 16/11/2018: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 Beta, Mesa 18.2.5, VirtualBox 6.0 Beta 2

    Links for the day



  6. Berkheimer or No Berkheimer, Software Patents Remain Mostly Unenforceable in the United States and the Supreme Court is Fine With That

    35 U.S.C. § 101, which is based on cases like Alice and Mayo, offers the 'perfect storm' against software patents; it doesn't look like any of that will change any time soon (if ever)



  7. Ignoring and Bashing Courts: Is This the Future of Patent Offices in the West?

    Andrei Iancu, who is trying to water down 35 U.S.C. § 101 while Trump ‘waters down’ SCOTUS (which delivered Alice), isn’t alone; António Campinos, the new President of the EPO, is constantly promoting software patents (which European courts reject, citing the EPC) and even Australia’s litigation ‘industry’ is dissenting against Australian courts that stubbornly reject software patents



  8. Patent Maximalists Are Still Trying to Figure Out How to Stop PTAB or Prevent US Patent Quality From Ever Improving

    Improvements are being made to US patents because of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), which amends/culls/pro-actively rejects (at application phases) bad patents; but the likes of Andrei Iancu cannot stand that because they're patent maximalists, who personally gain from an over-saturation of patents



  9. Links 15/11/2018: Zentyal 6.0, Deepin 15.8, Thunderbird Project Hiring

    Links for the day



  10. A Question of Debt: António Campinos, Lexology, Law Gazette, and Sam Gyimah

    Ineptitude in the media which dominates if not monopolises UPC coverage means that laws detrimental to everyone but patent lawyers are nowadays being pushed even by ministers (not just those whose clandestine vote is used/bought to steal democracy overnight)



  11. Science Minister Sam Gyimah and the EPO Are Eager to Attack Science by Bringing Patent Trolls to Europe/European Union and the United Kingdom

    Team UPC has managed to indoctrinate or hijack key positions, causing those whose job is to promote science to actually promote patent trolls and litigation (suppressing science rather than advancing it)



  12. USF Revisits EPO Abuses, Highlighting an Urgent Need for Action

    “Staff Representation Disciplinary Cases” — a message circulated at the end of last week — reveals the persistence of union-busting agenda and injustice at the EPO



  13. Links 14/11/2018: KDevelop 5.3, Omarine 5.3, Canonical Not for Sale

    Links for the day



  14. Second Day of EPOPIC: Yet More Promotion of Software Patents in Europe in Defiance of Courts, EPC, Parliament and Common Sense

    Using bogus interpretations of the EPC — ones that courts have repeatedly rejected — the EPO continues to grant bogus/fake/bunk patents on abstract ideas, then justifies that practice (when the audience comes from the litigation ‘industry’)



  15. Allegations That António Campinos 'Bought' His Presidency and is Still Paying for it

    Rumours persist that after Battistelli had rigged the election in favour of his compatriot nefarious things related to that were still visible



  16. WIPO Corruption and Coverup Mirror EPO Tactics

    Suppression of staff representatives and whistleblowers carries on at WIPO and the EPO; people who speak out about abuses are themselves being treated like abusers



  17. Links 13/11/2018: HPC Domination (Top 500 All GNU/Linux) and OpenStack News

    Links for the day



  18. The USPTO and EPO Pretend to Care About Patent Quality by Mingling With the Terms “Patent” and “Quality”

    The whole "patent quality" propaganda from EPO and USPTO management continues unabated; they strive to maintain the fiction that quality rather than money is their prime motivator



  19. Yannis Skulikaris Promotes Software Patents at EPOPIC, Defending the Questionable Practice Under António Campinos

    The reckless advocacy for abstract patents on mere algorithms from a new and less familiar face; the EPO is definitely eager to grant software patents and it explains to stakeholders how to do it



  20. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is Working for Patent Trolls and Patent Maximalists

    The patent trolls' propagandists are joining forces and pushing for a patent system that is hostile to science, technology, and innovation in general (so as to enable a bunch of aggressive law firms to tax everybody)



  21. Team UPC, Fronting for Patent Trolls From the US, is Calling Facts “Resistance”

    The tactics of Team UPC have gotten so tastelessly bad and its motivation so shallow (extortion in Europe) that one begins to wonder why these people are willing to tarnish everything that's left of their reputation



  22. The Federal Circuit Bar Association (FCBA) Will Spread the Berkheimer Lie While Legal Certainty Associated With Patents Remains Low and Few Lawsuits Filed

    New figures regarding patent litigation in the United States (number of lawsuits) show a decrease by about a tenth in just one year; there's still no sign of software patents making any kind of return/rebound in the United States, contrary to lies told by the litigation 'industry' (those who profit from frivolous lawsuits/threats)



  23. Links 12/11/2018: Linux 4.20 RC2, Denuvo DRM Defeated Again

    Links for the day



  24. Automation of Searches Will Not Solve the Legitimacy Problem Caused by Patents Lust

    The false belief that better searches and so-called 'AI' can miraculously assess patents will simply drive/motivate bad decisions and already steers bad management towards patent maximalism (presumption of examination/validation where none actually exists)



  25. The Federal Circuit and PTAB Are Not Slowing Down; Patent Maximalists Claim It's 'Harassment' to Question a Patent's Validity

    There’s no sign of stopping when it comes to harassment of judges and courts; those who make a living from patent threats and litigation do anything conceivable to stop the ‘bloodbath’ of US patents which were never supposed to have been granted in the first place



  26. Patent Maximalists Will Latch Onto Return Mail v US Postal Service in an Effort to Weaken or Limit Post-Grant Reviews of US Patents

    An upcoming case, dealing with what governments can and cannot do with/to patents (specifically the US government and US patents), interests the litigation 'industry' because it loathes reviews of low-quality and/or controversial patents (these reviews discourage litigation or stop lawsuits early on in the cycle)



  27. Guest Post: EPO Spins Censorship of Staff Representation

    Another concrete example of Campinos' cynical story-telling



  28. Andrei Iancu and Laura Peter Are Two Proponents of Patent Trolls at the Top of the USPTO

    Patent offices do not seem to care about the law, about the courts, about judges and so on; all they care about is money (and litigation costs) and that’s a very major problem



  29. The Patent 'Industry' Wants Incitations and Feuds, Not Innovation and Collaboration

    The litigation giants and their drones keep insisting that they're interested in helping scientists; but sooner or later the real (productive) industry learns to kick them to the curb and work together instead of suing



  30. EPO 'Outsourcing' Rumours

    The EPO advertises jobs in Prague and Lisbon; this leads to speculations less than a year after António Campinos sent EU-IPO jobs to India (for cost reduction)


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts