All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Analyzing the Production of the Law of Cyberspace
Unformatted Document Text:  16 accountable organizations. 61 These rules often lengthen the development time for standards. For example, an SDO standard may require several formal reviews, which can each take a minimum of six months. 62 This leads to a longer standardization process. For example, it typically takes seven years for an international SDO to develop a standard. 63 A consortium can develop standards more quickly, because it is not subject to the same procedural rules as SDOs. 64 The primary influence on the development of code within a consortium is its members. This is not surprising since consortia are structured to meet the demands of their members. The members typically choose to use a consortium, when there is no compelling reason for one entity to undertake the work. Consequently, it is the members who decide what projects to pursue and the appropriate level of resources. Additionally, the members’ choice of a consortium’s structure influences the development of code. The structural influences include the membership composition and membership rights, intellectual property rights, and the procedural rules that govern their work. For example, consider how the structural differences between the IETF and W3C shaped the development of code for labeling content on the web. The W3C used a closed private process during the development of PICS. This was because firms, such as Microsoft and IBM, agreed to work within the W3C only if PICS was developed rapidly. The W3C relied upon a dozen people during the entire developmental process. This structure allowed them to complete 61 Cargill points out that traditional standards organizations are so rule-bound today precisely because of the antitrust concerns that arose in the 1960s and '70s. According to Cargill, “Congress was concerned about 102 companies working quietly behind professional associations and twisting standards . . . By publishing rules, they could ensure they weren't working behind closed doors. But in an effort to address those concerns, they've become so rule-bound as to be too slow to address market needs.” Zuckerman, supra note 55. 62 Cargill, supra note 47,at 19. 63 Paul A. David & Mark Shurmer, Formal Standard-Setting for Global Telecommunications and Information Services, 20 T ELECOMM . P' CY 789, 793-95 (1996) (reporting the average time to develop a standard for a national SDO is two and a half years, to four to five years for a regional SDO, and over seven years for an international SDO). 64 Cargill, supra note 47,at 5.

Authors: Shah, Rajiv. and Kesan, Jay.
first   previous   Page 16 of 24   next   last



background image
16
accountable organizations.
61
These rules often lengthen the development time for standards. For
example, an SDO standard may require several formal reviews, which can each take a minimum
of six months.
62
This leads to a longer standardization process. For example, it typically takes
seven years for an international SDO to develop a standard.
63
A consortium can develop
standards more quickly, because it is not subject to the same procedural rules as SDOs.
64
The primary influence on the development of code within a consortium is its members.
This is not surprising since consortia are structured to meet the demands of their members. The
members typically choose to use a consortium, when there is no compelling reason for one entity
to undertake the work. Consequently, it is the members who decide what projects to pursue and
the appropriate level of resources. Additionally, the members’ choice of a consortium’s structure
influences the development of code. The structural influences include the membership
composition and membership rights, intellectual property rights, and the procedural rules that
govern their work.
For example, consider how the structural differences between the IETF and W3C shaped
the development of code for labeling content on the web. The W3C used a closed private
process during the development of PICS. This was because firms, such as Microsoft and IBM,
agreed to work within the W3C only if PICS was developed rapidly. The W3C relied upon a
dozen people during the entire developmental process. This structure allowed them to complete
61
Cargill points out that traditional standards organizations are so rule-bound today precisely because of the antitrust
concerns that arose in the 1960s and '70s. According to Cargill, “Congress was concerned about 102 companies
working quietly behind professional associations and twisting standards . . . By publishing rules, they could ensure
they weren't working behind closed doors. But in an effort to address those concerns, they've become so rule-bound
as to be too slow to address market needs.” Zuckerman, supra note 55.
62
Cargill, supra note 47,at 19.
63
Paul A. David & Mark Shurmer, Formal Standard-Setting for Global Telecommunications and Information
Services, 20 T
ELECOMM
. P'
CY
789, 793-95 (1996) (reporting the average time to develop a standard for a national
SDO is two and a half years, to four to five years for a regional SDO, and over seven years for an international
SDO).
64
Cargill, supra note 47,at 5.


Convention
All Academic Convention makes running your annual conference simple and cost effective. It is your online solution for abstract management, peer review, and scheduling for your annual meeting or convention.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 16 of 24   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.