TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION

Danielle Coffey

Vice President, Government Affairs

Brian Scarpelli

Manager, Government Affairs

10 G Street, N.E.

Suite 550

Washington, DC 20001

(202) 346-3240

Its Attorneys

February 22, 2011

Before the

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY,

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Effectiveness of Federal Agency Participation 

in Standardization in Select Technology 

Sectors for National Science and Technology 

Council’s Sub-Committee on Standardization

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 0909100442–0563–02

COMMENTS OF THE

TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION
Table of Contents

I. INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................2

II. REASONS FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE STANDARDS-SETTING 

PROCESS AND THE BENEFITS OF STANDARDIZATION .......................................4

A. THE BENEFITS OF STANDARDIZATION GENERALLY...............................4

B. THE BENEFITS OF TIA’S STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT PROCESS ..........7

III. TIA’s PERSPECTIVE ON THE GOVERNMENT’S APPROACH TO 

STANDARDIZATION ACTIVITIES ...........................................................................11

IV. ISSUES TIA CONSIDERS IN THE STANDARDS SETTING PROCESS ...................12

A. TIA URGES RECOGNITION OF THE VALUE OF STANDARDS 

DIVERSITY ......................................................................................................12

B. TIA SUPPORTS REASONABLE AND NON-DISCRIMINATORY 

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS POLICIES ........................................15

C. TIA SUPPORTS THE DEVELOPMENT OF OPEN STANDARDS .................19

D. TIA SUPPORTS THE VOLUNTARY EX ANTE DISCLOSURE OF 

LICENSING TERMS ........................................................................................21

V. THE IMPORTANCE OF ENSURING ADEQUACY OF RESOURCES.......................22

VI. TIA’S EVOLUTION THROUGH PROCESS REVIEW AND IMPROVEMENT 

METRICS .....................................................................................................................23

VII. CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................25
2

Before the

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY,

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Effectiveness of Federal Agency Participation 

in Standardization in Select Technology 

Sectors for National Science and Technology 

Council’s Sub-Committee on Standardization

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 0909100442–0563–02

COMMENTS OF THE

TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION

I. INTRODUCTION

TIA represents a large number of information and communications technology (ICT) 

companies and organizations in standards, government affairs, market intelligence and 

product-oriented environmental compliance. A major function of TIA is the writing and 

maintenance of voluntary industry standards and specifications, as well as the formulation of 

technical positions for presentation on behalf of the United States in certain international 

standards fora. TIA is accredited by ANSI to develop voluntary industry standards for a wide 

variety of telecommunications products and sponsors more than 70 standards formulating 

committees. These committees are made up of over 1,000 volunteer participants, including 

representatives from manufacturers of telecommunications equipment, service providers and 

end-users, including the government. 

The member companies and other stakeholders participating in the efforts of these 

committees and sub-groups have produced more than 3,000 standards and technical papers that 
3

are used by companies and governments to produce interoperable products around the world.

TIA also has a Standards and Intellectual Property Policy Committee (SIPC) that is focused on, 

among others, policy issues related to the ICT standardization system on a global basis.

TIA is and has been a standards development organization (SDO) since its inception in 

1988, and is one of the largest SDOs accredited by ANSI. TIA's standards development and 

environmental activities have both a national and global reach and impact. TIA is one of the 

founding partners and also serves as Secretariat for 3GPP2 (a consortium of five SDOs in the 

U.S., Japan, Korea, and China with more than 65 member companies) which is engaged in 

drafting future-oriented wireless communications standards.1

 TIA also is active in the 

formulation of United States positions on technical and policy issues, administering four 

International Secretariats and 16 U.S. Technical Advisory Groups (TAGs) to international 

technical standards committees at the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), and is 

the International Secretariat and US TAG Administrator for the International Organization for 

Standardization (ISO) Technical Committee (TC) 204 on Intelligent Transportation Systems.

TIA’s standards committees create consensus-based voluntary standards for numerous 

facets of the ICT industry, for use by both private sector interests and government, which fall 

within the purview of the Request for Information.2 Among other things, TIA’s standards 

 

1 See 3GPP2, About 3GPP2, available at http://www.3gpp2.org/Public_html/Misc/AboutHome.cfm (last visited 

January 4, 2011).

2 TIA publishes an annual report that includes the latest actions taken by each respective TIA engineering committee 

toward the development of standards for the advancement of global communications. See TIA, Standards & 

Technology Annual Report (September 2010), available at 

http://tiaonline.org/standards/about/documents/StarReport_09-10.pdf.
4

committees develop protocols and interface standards relating to Smart Grid,3 health care ICT,4

and emergency communications infrastructure5 through its development of standards for such 

areas as fiber optics, public and private interworking, telecommunications cable infrastructure, 

wireless and mobile communications, multimedia and VoIP access, as well as vehicular 

telematics.

II. REASONS FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE STANDARDS-SETTING PROCESS 

AND THE BENEFITS OF STANDARDIZATION

A. THE BENEFITS OF STANDARDIZATION GENERALLY

Standards are a powerful tool for organizations of all sizes, private and governmental, 

and support innovation as well as increased productivity. 

Our association members and others come to TIA to develop standards that:

• Promote efficiency and interoperability.

o Enhance industry collaboration to solve market-driven demands and customer 

needs.

 

3 TIA’s TR-50 (Smart Device Communications) is responsible for the development and maintenance of access

agnostic interface standards for the monitoring and bi-directional communication of events and information between 

smart devices and other devices, applications or networks. See http://tr50.tiaonline.org.

4 TIA’s TR-49 (Healthcare ICT) is responsible for development and maintenance of standards for the healthcare ICT 

applications which involve medical devices, network infrastructure, applications, and operations support. See

http://tr49.tiaonline.org. 

5 Engineering Committee TR-8 formulates and maintains standards for private radio communications systems and 

equipment for both voice and data applications. TR-8 addresses all technical matters for systems and services, 

including definitions, interoperability, compatibility, and compliance requirements. The types of systems addressed 

by these standards include business and industrial dispatch applications, as well as public safety (such as police, 

ambulance and fire fighting) applications. See http://tr8.tiaonline.org.
5

• Enable access to new technologies and markets.

o Help diffuse innovative solutions across the industry while maintaining respect 

for intellectual property rights and supporting incentives for companies to further 

invest in related R&D.6

o Create opportunities for further competition among differentiated

implementations and products, which provides stimulus for more innovation

and choice for customers and users.

In no sector more than ICT must standards constantly be updated to remain relevant. To 

remain pertinent and useful, and to take into account the latest technical solutions to aide in 

moving the industry forward, TIA standards are continuously developed and reviewed. These 

standards frequently compete with other standards in an extremely vibrant international 

environment, facilitating market-driven growth, industry competitiveness and choice.7

In some cases, however, products implementing a standard may not automatically solve a 

technology challenge. Adherence to a standard may not ensure that competing products will 

actually interoperate. Further industry collaboration often may be necessary (such as 

conformance and interoperability testing) in order to accomplish specific objectives.

 

6 TIA, Intellectual Property Rights Standing Committee Paper on Open Standards (Jun. 20, 2008), available at 

http://www.tiaonline.org/standards/about/documents/TIA-IPR_20080620-003_TIA_OPEN_STANDARDS.pdf.

7 For example, the choice with respect to US wireless technology between the CDMA-train standards developed by 

TIA and 3GPP2, and the GSM-train standards developed by ETSI and 3GPP (including ATIS, the US-based 3GPPsponsoring organization).
6

For governmental entities, the ability to partake in voluntary consensus standard 

development has many benefits and is consistent with goals of the U.S. Government as reflected 

in the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act and OMB Circular A-119.8

 TIA 

believes that the OMB Circular has been very effective, and supports its recognition of the value 

of “voluntary consensus standards”. This term is defined broadly to include standards from 

ANSI-accredited SDOs and also a wide range of consortia, further evidencing the U.S. 

Government's recognition of the value of having competition and diversity among standardssetting organizations.

Furthermore, because standardization is a form of economic self-regulation, it can relieve 

the government of the responsibility for developing detailed technical specifications while 

ensuring that voluntary consensus standards serve the public interest, saving resources that can 

be used to serve the public interest in other ways. Standards may be used to define an acceptable 

level of performance, and through participation in the process, a governmental entity can work to 

ensure that an adequate level of service is offered to the public in a particular area. In some 

limited instances, the government has made standards legally binding to assure a minimum level 

 

8 TIA understands that NIST has a coordinating function with the U.S. Government under the National Technology 

Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-113), which is further implemented through OMB Circular 

A-119. See OMB Circular A-119 Revised, Federal Participation in the Development and Use of Voluntary 

Consensus Standards and in Conformity Assessment Activities (rev. Feb. 10, 1998) (OMB Circular A-119) 

available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/rewrite/circulars/a119/a119.html.
7

of public safety through safe harbors.9

 In addition, standards may also be used by government 

entities as valuable sources of scientific and technical information, allowing for agencies to use 

standards as a resource for advanced technical information without first-hand independent 

knowledge of research in the area.

B. THE BENEFITS OF TIA’S STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT PROCESS

Standards projects and technical documents at TIA are formulated according to the

guidelines established in the association's Engineering Manual.10 Any potential project is 

initiated by a technical contribution to one of the engineering committees or subcommittees from 

an individual requesting the creation of a new standard or technical document in a particular area 

of technology.

If there is support for this contribution, and a number of people are willing to work on the 

project, a Project Initiation Notice (PIN) form is completed and submitted for approval to TIA. 

 

9 Section 107(a)(2) of CALEA contains a safe harbor provision, stating that "[a] telecommunications carrier shall be 

found to be in compliance with the assistance capability requirements under section 103, and a manufacturer of 

telecommunications transmission or switching equipment or a provider of telecommunications support services shall 

be found to be in compliance with section 106 if the carrier, manufacturer, or support service provider is in 

compliance with publicly available technical requirements or standards adopted by an industry association or 

standard-setting organization, or by the Commission under subsection (b), to meet the requirements of section 103." 

47 U.S.C. § 1006(a)(2). Subcommittee TR-45.2 of TIA, along with Committee T1 of the Alliance for 

Telecommunications Industry Solutions, developed interim standard J-STD-025 to serve as a "safe harbor" for 

wireline, cellular, and broadband PCS carriers and manufacturers under section 107(a) of CALEA. The standard 

defines services and features required by wireline, cellular, and broadband PCS carriers to support lawfully 

authorized electronic surveillance, and specifies interfaces necessary to deliver intercepted communications and callidentifying information to a law enforcement agency. See TIA, Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement 

Act (CALEA), available at http://www.tiaonline.org/standards/technology/calea/ (last visited February 22, 2011).

10 TIA, TIA Engineering Manual (Oct. 2009) available at 

http://www.tiaonline.org/standards/procedures/manuals/engineering.cfm.
8

After the project is approved for initiation, the engineering committees and their subcommittees 

work to further develop the technical parameters of the project. When the proposed standard or 

technical document is near completion, the formulating engineering committee circulates the 

draft of the document on a ballot called a "Committee Ballot." The purpose of this ballot is to 

identify any unresolved issues and to establish consensus within the formulating group. Every 

effort is made to resolve comments received. During this phase of the standards-making process, 

the draft of the document is not released to the general public.

If the document is intended to be an American National Standard, the proposed draft 

must be circulated as an industry-wide ballot, also known as an "Industry Ballot.” During the 

balloting period, any interested party may comment. Every attempt is made to resolve comments 

received at this phase of the balloting, and when necessary, commenters are apprised of the 

appeals process. During this phase of balloting, a copy of the draft standard may be acquired by 

non-participants. After the final draft of the document has obtained industry consensus, the 

document is forwarded with all its balloting information to a review group at TIA called the 

Telecommunications Standards Subcommittee (TSSC). If the document is intended to be an 

American National Standard, the same information is forwarded to the ANSI Board of Standards 

Review (BSR) with request for approval.

The balloting information is then reviewed by TSSC, and supporting documents are 

checked to see if TIA due process and other requirements have been met. After this review and 

upon approval of the BSR, the document is approved for publication as a TIA Standard.
9

A standard which is an American National Standard must be reviewed every five years to 

ensure it remains current. During this five-year period, a standard may be reaffirmed, modified 

or rescinded.

Through TIA’s voluntary and consensus-based standards development process described 

above, the following attributes are exemplified:

• Openness, which is defined as the availability of memberships and participation in the 

standards development process to all interested industry participants.

• Balancing the interests of a diverse community of participants in the standards 

development process.

• Due process.

• An appeals process.

• Consensus-based decision making, which is defined as general agreement, but not 

necessarily unanimity, and includes a process for attempting to resolve objections by 

interested parties, as long as all comments have been fairly considered, each objector is 

advised of the disposition of his or her objection(s) and the reasons why, and the 

consensus body members are given an opportunity to change their votes after reviewing 

the comments.

TIA’s association members and others come to TIA to develop standards that promote 

efficiency and interoperability, enhancing industry collaboration to solve market-driven demands 

and customer needs. This enables access to new technologies and markets, helps diffuse 

innovative solutions across the industry while maintaining respect for intellectual property rights 

and supporting incentives for companies to further invest in related R&D. TIA’s process also 
10

creates opportunities for further competition among differentiated implementations and products, 

which provides stimulus for more innovation and choice for customers and users.

Federal agencies, as well as companies of all sizes, participate in TIA’s standards 

process.

11 The standardization system plays a major role in the ongoing competitiveness and 

innovation of the ICT industry, directly affecting Federal agencies. The current process has 

fostered a dynamic and responsive standards environment that has aided the ICT industry in 

growing domestically and internationally. Federal participation ensures that agencies’ interests 

are protected, along with the above-noted benefits of a voluntary, consensus-based 

standardization process.

In order to stay relevant and effective, and to accommodate new, innovative technical 

solutions that can help our members and others move the industry forward, TIA standards 

continuously evolve and often compete with other standards in a very dynamic global ecosystem. 

This enables market-driven growth, industry competitiveness and choice. In this way, TIA’s 

engineering committees continuously formulate “strategic plan[s] that identify standards needs 

and define the standard development cycle.”12 

 

11 For example, Federal participation occurs on such TIA engineering committees as TR-8 (Mobile and Personal 

Private Radio Standards), and TR-45 (Mobile and Personal Communications Systems Standards).

12 Effectiveness of Federal Agency Participation in Standardization in Select Technology Sectors for National 

Science and Technology Council’s Sub-Committee on Standardization, 75 Fed. Reg. 76398 (Dec. 8, 2010) (NSTC 

RFI).
11

III. TIA’S PERSPECTIVE ON THE GOVERNMENT’S APPROACH TO 

STANDARDIZATION ACTIVITIES

TIA supports government efforts so that public authorities can more easily acquire ICT 

services, applications and products that meet their specific requirements. TIA encourages the 

participation of Federal agencies in its technical standards-setting process, and greatly 

appreciates the value of the public-private sector partnership that exists in the U.S. with regards 

to standards.

As a practical matter, TIA does not believe it is possible to have a single coordinating 

point in the U.S. Government for all technical standards areas, and indeed this could have the 

unintended consequence of slowing down standardization and technological innovation. The 

technical needs of different sectors of the economy vary. The solutions appropriate and 

applicable to Internet Service Providers may not be the same as those needed by the banking or 

energy industries. It is difficult to see how one group of experts can be aware of, and sensitive 

to, the needs of an entire economy.

TIA, however, greatly appreciates the value of the public-private sector partnership that 

exists in the U.S. with regards to standards. In its role as a partner, the U.S. Government may 

want to create a better mechanism to coordinate U.S. Government input into the standards 

system – whether in terms of articulating its collective needs or helping it to address specific 

technology areas where it has a vested interest in standards-related outcomes.

TIA also believes that the U.S. Government serves an important role in terms of 

advocating the "multiple path" approach to developing international standards, raising concerns 

when there may be trade-related or other standards issues that arise among different nations and 
12

as a stakeholder in the standards development process in technology areas where it has a specific 

interest.

TIA understands that NIST has a coordinating function with the U.S. Government `under 

the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-113), which 

is further implemented through OMB Circular A-119.

13 TIA believes that the OMB Circular 

wisely recognized the importance of “voluntary consensus standards.” This term is defined 

broadly to include standards from a wide range of SDOs (including ANSI-accredited SDOs) and 

consortia, further evidencing the U.S. Government's recognition of the value of having 

competition and diversity among standards-setting organizations.

IV. ISSUES TIA CONSIDERS IN THE STANDARDS SETTING PROCESS

A. TIA URGES RECOGNITION OF THE VALUE OF STANDARDS 

DIVERSITY

As an ANSI-accredited SDO, TIA complies with the ANSI Essential Requirements, 

which detail the process a SDO must undertake to ensure a good faith effort is made to ensure 

that duplicative or wasteful standard development processes do not occur.14 TIA supports and 

adheres to the approach outlined in the ANSI Essential Requirements to address conflict and 

duplication issues and has found it to be effective. In the course of its good faith efforts, TIA 

consults with international standard development organizations and clearinghouses, as well as 

 

13 OMB Circular A-119.

14 ANSI, ANSI Essential Requirements: Due process requirements for American National Standards (Jan. 2010),

available at www.ansi.org/essentialrequirements.
13

individually with other SDOs. The ANSI approach, while requiring SDOs to share information 

and consult each other (with input from their stakeholders), adds value while not unduly 

burdening SDOs or disrupting the dynamic ICT standardization ecosystem.

While TIA supports efforts to avoid duplication and conflict in the standard development 

arena, it should be recognized that U.S. industry competitiveness depends on standardization, 

particularly in sectors such as ICT that are dynamic and technology-driven. The U.S. Patent & 

Trademark Office noted that the U.S. is a market-driven, highly diversified society, and its 

standards system encompasses and reflects this framework, which extends to adoption of 

standards.15 TIA agrees, and specifically notes that both the U.S. and international ICT 

standards systems have experienced tremendous growth, development and diversity. 

The success of the standards produced by an ICT SDO should not be based upon 

processes or procedures, but rather should primarily be a result of a number of market-based ICT 

factors (such as responsiveness to different customer needs, effectiveness of the standard and 

associated technologies, etc.) that impact ultimate acceptance by industry. For example, giving 

one standard some level of priority over another in the same technology area based on reasons 

such as which one was finalized first will adversely impact the flexibility, competition, and 

choice that fuel the ICT industry and help bring new innovative solutions to the marketplace. 

The European Union’s Directorate General of Competition has likewise noted that when a single 

technology has been mandated, it may create barriers to entry and stem innovation in the 

 

15See World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Standing Committee on the Law of Patents, Statement of the 

United States Patent & Trademark Office (March 25, 2009), available at

http://publicaa.ansi.org/sites/apdl/Documents/Standards%20Activities/Critical%20Issues/Open%20Standards/USPT

O-WIPO-Statement.pdf
14

standards process, and additionally articulates the danger of this effect.16 With this ideal in 

mind, TIA urges the U.S. government to be wary of creating regulations that will likely have a 

negative impact on the dynamic ICT standards ecosystem by discouraging multiple standards in 

the same technology area. 

Within the ICT sector multiple standards are often needed within the same technology 

area in order to provide choice, address different user requirements, or respond to marketplace 

needs (such as home networks, cellular standards, database access models, document formats, 

Web programming models, and digital image and media formats). Regulatory burdens would

have a particularly inflated effect on ICT standardization due to the fast-paced nature of this 

sector’s development. TIA submits that it is the ICT market – not regulations – that should 

primarily determine which standard or standards are adopted and used in the industry. The 

current procedures, internal to ANSI as defined by the ANSI Essential Requirements, to reduce 

unnecessary conflict and duplication have worked and are sufficient to encourage to coordination 

among ICT standards bodies when appropriate.

 

16 European Commission, Communication From the Commission, Guidelines on the applicability of Article 101 of 

the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to horizontal co-operation agreements (2010), available at 

http://ec.europa.eu/competition/antitrust/legislation/horizontal_guidelines_en.pdf.
15

B. TIA SUPPORTS REASONABLE AND NON-DISCRIMINATORY 

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS POLICIES

As described above, market‐driven open standards can help promote competition and 

innovation, and such standards are developed or ratified through a voluntary, open and 

consensus‐based process. This process typically includes an IPR policy pursuant to which patent 

holders make commitments to offer licenses to essential patented technology on reasonable and 

non‐discriminatory (RAND) terms and conditions, with or without compensation.17 

This type of IPR policy addresses implementers’ need to access and use patented 

technology included in the standard, while patent holders need to preserve their rights in a way 

that encourages them to innovate and to contribute their innovative solutions to the 

standardization effort. RAND patent policies seek to provide this balance by helping to make 

that patented technology available to all on RAND terms and conditions. RAND commitments 

can prevent IPR holders from making the implementation of a standard difficult by refusing to 

license or by requesting unfair or unreasonable fees after the industry has been locked into the 

standard or by charging discriminatory royalty fees.

Like many others, TIA encourages the early disclosure of essential patents, but does not 

mandate disclosure and does not require the making of a search for patents. To further such 

encouragement, TIA takes a three-part approach:

 

17 This is consistent with OMB Circular A-119, which states that voluntary, consensus standards “include provisions 

requiring that owners of relevant intellectual property have agreed to make that intellectual property available on a 

non-discriminatory, royalty-free or reasonable royalty basis to all interested parties.” OMB Circular A-119.
16

i. The chairs of formulating groups are required to insure that everyone in attendance is 

aware of TIA’s intellectual property rights policy and where it can be found.

ii. The second part of the approach is a notification on each ballot for a proposed standard 

encouraging the identification of essential patents or published patent applications.

iii. Finally, the Manual provides for an optional, voluntary disclosure statement on a 

submission cover sheet. For this purpose, TIA provides a suggested submission form, 

some provisions of which are mandatory when this form is used.

When a party is prepared to submit a patent holder’s statement to TIA, it is required to 

use the form appended to the TIA Engineering Manual as Annex H. Patent holder statements are 

archived on the TIA Website, which contains the following cautionary note:

“TIA’s IPR patent holder statements contain patent holder statements or copyright 

holder statements which have been provided to TIA and claim IPR or pending 

patent applications as being essential, or potentially essential, to the 

implementation of TIA standards. Unless otherwise specified, all patent holder or 

copyright holder statements contained herein have been provided to TIA, with an 

undertaking from the owner to grant licenses according to the terms and 

conditions of TIA’s Engineering Manual which contains TIA’s patent policy. TIA 

makes no representations or warranties, and disclaims any and all responsibility, 

with respect to the accuracy, correctness, completeness or scope of such 

statements, or any claims of IPR contained or identified therein.”
17

The use of the Patent Holder Statement as contained in the Manual is mandatory. Among 

the statements’ central provisions are the following:

“On behalf of the above Patent Holder, and being authorized by the Patent Holder to 

make such statements, the following is indicated: With respect to any Essential Patent(s) 

necessary for the practice of any or all Normative portions of the above Reference 

Document as it exists on the date of submittal of this form, should such Reference 

Document be approved as a Standard.”

The undersigned Patent Holder states one of the following:

a) “A license under any Essential Patent(s), the license rights to which are held by the 

undersigned Patent Holder, will be made available to all applicants under terms and 

conditions that are reasonable and non-discriminatory, without monetary compensation, 

and only to the extent necessary for the practice of any or all of the Normative portions of 

the above Reference Document for the field of use of practice of the Standard; OR

b) A license under any Essential Patent(s), the license rights to which are held by the 

undersigned Patent Holder, will be made available to all applicants under terms and 

conditions that are reasonable and non-discriminatory, which may include monetary 

compensation, and only to the extent necessary for the practice of any or all of the 

Normative portions of the above Reference Document for the field of use of practice of 

the Standard.”
18

Either Paragraph (a) or (b), whichever is selected above, may be modified below by 

marking one or both of the following:

i. “The commitment to license above selected will be made available only on a reciprocal 

basis. The term “reciprocal” means that the licensee is willing to license the licensor in 

compliance with either Paragraph (2a) or (2b) above as respects the practice of the above 

Reference Document.

ii. The undersigned Patent Holder hereby limits its commitment to license under either 

Paragraph (2a) or (2b) above to the Essential Patent(s) identified by issuance and filing 

dates and numbers on Exhibit “A” attached hereto, and represents that Exhibit “A” 

contains all the undersigned’s known licensable Essential Patent(s) rights, as of the date 

stated below, only to the extent necessary for the practice of any or all of the Normative 

portions of the above Reference Document. The undersigned Patent Holder undertakes to 

advise TIA of any licensable Essential Patent(s) rights of the undersigned which become 

known to the undersigned after this date and to notify TIA whether a license will be made 

available with respect thereto in accordance with the TIA IPR Policy. Nothing in this 

statement requires the undersigned Patent Holder to make a patent search.”

The statements contained in Paragraphs (2a) or (2b), if marked, along with any 

modifications selected above are irrevocable and binding upon the Patent Holder. In the event 

the rights of the Patent Holder in and to the Essential Patent(s) subject to such commitments are 

assigned or transferred, the Patent Holder must notify the assignee or transferee of the existence 

of such commitments.
19

C. TIA SUPPORTS THE DEVELOPMENT OF OPEN STANDARDS

Many globally recognized standards bodies like TIA, the International Organization for 

Standardization (ISO), the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), the International 

Telecommunication Union (ITU), the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI), 

the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), etc. produce “Open Standards” that 

address many important ICT challenges in the marketplace while preserving incentives for 

further innovation and improvements over time. 

This widely accepted definition of an “Open Standard” is reflected in the following: 

• Global Standards Collaboration (GSC) – Reaffirmed resolution GSC‐15/24;

18

• ITU‐T;

19 and 

• ANSI.

20

 

18 ITU, RESOLUTION GSC-15/24: (IPRWG) Open Standards (reaffirmed), (Sept. 2, 2010), available at 

http://www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu-t/oth/21/06/T210600000C0020MSWE.doc.

19 ITU, TSB Director’s Ad Hoc Group: Definition of “Open Standards”, available at http://www.itu.int/en/ITUT/ipr/Pages/open.aspx (last visited February 22, 2011).

20 ANSI, Current Attempts to Change Established Definition of “Open” Standards (May 2005), available at 

http://publicaa.ansi.org/sites/apdl/Documents/Standards%20Activities/Critical%20Issues/Open%20Standards/CIPOpenStandards.pdf.
20

For example, TIA supports the GSC Resolution that outlines the following elements of an 

“Open Standard”: 

• The standard is developed and/or approved, and maintained by a collaborative consensus‐

based process; 

• Such process is transparent; 

• Materially affected and interested parties are not excluded from such process; 

• The standard is subject to RAND IPR policies which do not mandate, but may permit, at 

the option of the IPR holder, licensing essential intellectual property without 

compensation; and 

• The standard is published and made available to the general public under reasonable 

terms (including for reasonable fee or for free). 

Recently, there have been attempts to re‐define “Open Standards” that may disrupt this 

process and its related balance of interests. The concept of “open” has been equated with 

patented technology that is “free” (without payment) or “free to use freely” (without payment 

and without any restrictions). These proposed re‐definitions are being used to advocate policy 

changes that would undermine the rights of those who have invested in the development of the 

standardized technology. 

While the notion of patents being “free to use freely” is superficially attractive, like most 

“free” things, it comes at a cost. Technological capabilities and innovations most often result 

from substantial investments in R&D. Such investments typically drive the growth of the 

investor’s patent portfolio. If patent holders in standards‐setting activities are expected to give 
21

away or waive their patent rights, there are likely to be significant adverse results including: 

• Technology leaders will reduce or cease participation in (or technical contributions to) 

voluntary standards‐related activities; or 

• Individuals and organizations will not invest (or will invest less) in the development of 

innovative and next‐generation technology in the technical areas subject to 

standardization, thereby creating innovation “dead zones” in those areas. 

These types of adverse results would cause (a) the standardization system; (b) its open, 

voluntary and consensus‐based process; and (c) ultimately the resulting Open Standards, to be 

less effective or successful than they are today. Moreover, TIA believes that these results would 

have a negative impact on global respect for intellectual property that helps stimulate innovation 

and develops local economies around the world.

D. TIA SUPPORTS THE VOLUNTARY EX ANTE DISCLOSURE OF 

LICENSING TERMS

TIA believes that mandating the ex ante disclosure of specific licensing terms within such 

standards bodies would have a chilling effect on participation, contributions and the resulting 

standards. Moreover, standards bodies and their constituents are in the best position to craft their 

IPR policies to address their particular circumstances. While TIA does not require ex ante

disclosure of licensing terms, TIA does not object if a TIA participant wishes to voluntarily 

disclose its terms. Moreover, licensing negotiations are between the licensee and licensor and 

are to be conducted outside of the TIA standardization process. TIA also notes that ex ante
22

disclosure of one set of terms and conditions fails to recognize the diversity in standards, 

licensing arrangements, and business interactions. RAND based policies, however, recognize 

this diversity.

RAND is the most common model used across SDOs makes it easier for collaboration on 

standards or the referencing of each other’s standards. As a result of its RAND policy, TIA has 

only experienced a single related appeal in the history of its existence. For this reason, TIA 

believes that changes to the current RAND framework, regardless of how well intentioned, could 

easily disrupt the flexibility and balance that has been achieved among the various stakeholders. 

Such imbalance could in turn result in unforeseen and unintended negative consequences.

V. THE IMPORTANCE OF ENSURING ADEQUACY OF RESOURCES

TIA agrees that “the availability and commitment of financial resources, personnel, and 

industry expertise may impact the success of standards development.”21 While priorities and 

associated funding availability may shift and change, this is an experience of all entities that 

participate in standards development, whether public or private, large or small. The members of 

TIA understand the value of participation in standards development – particularly in an industry 

as dynamic as the ICT industry – and work to dedicate financial and personnel resources towards 

these efforts.

Likewise, it is important that Federal agencies appreciate the importance of involvement 

in standard development, and the resulting benefits of participation as described above. TIA 

 

21 NSTC RFI at 76398.
23

recommends that Federal agencies work towards ensuring that recurring, dedicated budget 

allocations are attained for participation in standards development. Accordingly, TIA urges 

Federal government agencies to make all possible efforts to ensure continuous participation in 

standards development efforts.

VI. TIA’S EVOLUTION THROUGH PROCESS REVIEW AND IMPROVEMENT 

METRICS

While the international standards system was developed 50 years ago, it has not remained 

static, and TIA has evolved with it. Indeed, the U.S. and international information and 

telecommunications standards systems have experienced tremendous growth and development. 

This system has become very dynamic and diverse in order to address more and more 

complicated and increasingly global needs. For example, it has had to take into consideration the 

global development of the Internet and the need for mobile telephones that must operate in many 

different countries. These changes and developments have been led and driven by competing 

member companies to meet their business and technical needs in changing business 

environments. 

As reflected in the United States Standards Strategy and the positions articulated by the 

Office of the U.S. Trade Representative at the World Trade Organization, the U.S. broadly 

supports the "multiple path" approach to the development of international standards. While 

some countries express the view that only ISO, IEC, and the ITU can produce "international 

standards" because they largely adhere to a national member body framework, the U.S. strongly 

advocates that any standard that is developed through an open, transparent process and is widely 

implemented on a global basis can be considered to be an international standard. While TIA is 

accredited by ANSI (and must undergo regular audits to remain accredited) as a developer of 
24

American National Standards, many of TIA's standards are internationally accepted and used; 

TIA submits that this widespread adoption is the most important indicator of success as a 

performance metric.

To evaluate the effectiveness of a standard, the market shares of the goods or services 

based on the standard should be considered. While market share may not be apparent until after 

the early stages of the release of the standard, in some cases the relevant market shares of the 

companies having participated in developing the standard could be used as a proxy for estimating 

the likely market share of the standard.

While many of TIA's standards are internationally accepted and used, there are a number 

of different standards bodies, from the most formal to the least formal, that also produce 

successful standards. The success of the standards they produce, however, is not based upon a 

denned process or procedure but rather is a result of a number of factors (such as responsiveness 

to customer need) that impact ultimate acceptance by the broader industry. This competition and 

diversity among standards bodies has resulted in a dynamic ecosystem that is very valuable to 

the similarly dynamic ICT industry sector. Through this dynamic system many ICT standards 

that have been widely used around the world reflect U.S.-based technology solutions and in turn 

have supported U.S. competitiveness in the global marketplace. TIA is proud to be a successful 

SDO in this ever-changing environment.
25

VII. CONCLUSION

TIA appreciates consideration of the above policies, commends the Department of 

Commerce for recognizing the vital role that standardization activities play in innovation, and 

values the opportunity to provide input in response to the Request for Information.

Respectfully submitted,

TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION

By: ____________________

Danielle Coffey

Vice President, Government Affairs

Brian Scarpelli

Manager, Government Affairs

Its Attorneys

February 22, 2011