InfoQ

InfoQ

News

My Bookmarks

Login or Register to enable bookmarks for unlimited time.

The content has been bookmarked!

There was an error bookmarking this content! Please retry.

IBM Interoperability Pledge

Posted by Mark Little on Jul 11, 2007

Sections
Enterprise Architecture,
Operations & Infrastructure,
Process & Practices,
Architecture & Design,
Development
Topics
SOA ,
Announcements
Tags
IBM ,
Web services
IBM has announced that it is granting universal and perpetual access to certain intellectual property that might be necessary to implement more than 150 standards designed to make software interoperable. As the press release states:
One likely result of the pledge to commercial and open source communities is that it will be easier for more computing devices and software to be compatible with one another. The move, which IBM believes is the largest of its kind, is also designed to spur industry innovation, while discouraging litigation.
and Bob Sutor, IBM's VP of Open Source and Standards, added:
"IBM is sending a message that innovation and industry growth happens in an open, collaborative atmosphere. Users will adopt new technologies if they know that they can find those technologies in a variety of interchangeable, compatible products from competing vendors. We think customers will like this added assurance for the open standards upon which they have come to depend."
Previously, all adopters of these specifications and protocols needed to secure royalty-free licensing terms from IBM and often co-authors. This move clarifies and makes more consistent the intellectual property usage rules, encouraging even wider implementations of open standards. IBM hopes that others companies and intellectual property holders make similar commitments.

IBM has created a set of pages dedicated to the Interoperability Pledge and the front page states:
IBM is offering a patent non-assert pledge to include the software specifications identified in the following list. IBM intends this pledge to include specifications for software interoperability for which it has made a royalty-free patent licensing commitment. No action is required by users of these specifications to invoke this non-assert commitment.
The list of specifications covered is quite impressive, including SCA/SDO, XACML 1.0/1.1, XML 1.0/1.1, MTOM, WS-MTOMPolicy 1.0, OpenDocument 1.0/1.1, OGSA, OWL, SAML 2.0, SOAP 1.2, UDDI, WS-RM, WS-Security, WS-Addressing, WS-AtomicTransaction, WS-BusinessActivity, WSDL etc. etc.
  • This article is part of a featured topic series on SOA
Nice gesture but this basically corrects a mistake by Eric Newcomer Posted
  1. Back to top

    Nice gesture but this basically corrects a mistake

    by Eric Newcomer

    Standards in general are not something anyone should be seeking to impede with patent claims in the first place. I always cite the example of the World Wide Web, and Tim Berners-Lee's conscious decision not to seek any patents for his inventions (i.e. contributions thereto) of HTTP, URL, and HTML. I believe this is one of the reasons the Web has become so widely adopted, and why its standards have become the foundation for so much innovation.

    Sometimes I have asked the rhetorical question: "Can you imagine if IBM or Microsoft had invented the Web?" Would they have decided not to try to patent it? If they had (which seems likely given their view toward Web services standards - Microsoft having previously made an equivalent statement last year:
    www.microsoft.com/interop/osp/default.mspx), would that have inhibited the adoption of the Web?

    So this is good news, yes, but it just highlights the fact that many Web services specifications were previously encumbered by patent rights. Although Web services have been widely adopted and implemented anyway - but mainly SOAP and WSDL, which are published by the W3C, which has (because of Tim) a very strict policy against encumbering specifications with patents. (Which by the way was also a major reason for Microsoft and IBM to start submitting specifications to OASIS instead of W3C, and why the industry does not have any real leadership around Web services standardization efforts, or a consisent architecture for Web services.)

    It would be interesting to understand how much of the WS-* "backlash" has been caused by the IP issues highlighted by this, and Microsoft's prior, announcement.

Educational Content

New-age Transactional Systems - Not Your Grandpa's OLTP

John Hugg discusses high volume transaction processing applications with high and low frequency profiles, and how VoltDB can be used for that purpose.

Cool Code

Kevlin Henney examines code samples to see what can be learned from them starting from the premise that one won’t write great code unless he knows how to read it.

Collaboration: At the Extremities of Extreme

Jason Ayers share the observations he made watching a team of developers collaborating in real time on the same code base, pushing XP, pair programming and continuous integration to their extremes.

Yesod Web Framework

Michael Snoyman presents Yesod, a web framework written in Haskell and containing a web server, templating, ORM, libraries (templating, gravatar, etc.).

Transactions without Transactions

Richard Kreuter and Kyle Banker on how to avoid classical RDBMS transactional systems by using compensation mechanisms, transactional messaging or transactional procedures.

Attila Szegedi on JVM and GC Performance Tuning at Twitter

Attila Szegedi talks about performance tuning Java and Scala programs at Twitter: how to approach GC problems, the importance of asynchronous I/O, when to use MySQL/Cassandra/Redis, and much more.

10 tips on how to prevent business value risk

One category of risk that project teams need to ensure they address is business value failure – delivering a product that fails to provide value for the business investor.

Interview: Software Systems Architecture: Working With Stakeholders Using Viewpoints and Perspectives

InfoQ spoke to the authors of Software Systems Architecture on a couple of new topics, the System Context viewpoint and Agile, which have been added to the second edition.