Excerpts from Section 3 (“SSO Taxonomy”) of IPO Standards Setting Committee, Standards Primer: An Overview of Standards Setting Bodies and Patent-Related Issues that Arise in the Context of Standards Setting Activities, 2009 IPO Articles & Reps., Pats. Sec. No. 16 (posted: 10/09/2009)
[...]
[T]he two main types of [Standard Setting Organizations, "SSOs"] are formal, recognized bodies (international, regional, national bodies) and Consortia (single technology, short term Special Interest Groups, or multiple technologies, long term Alliances).
[...]
It is useful to classify SSOs by geographic scope at three levels: International Bodies; Regional Bodies; and National Bodies. [ . . .]
International Standards Setting Bodies
[There are] four widely recognized, well-established, formal international standards developers: the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), and the Joint Technical Committee (JTC1) which is a joint group of IEC and ISO. Based in Geneva, Switzerland, these international standards developers are comprised of member countries and generally have broad standardization authority and significant longevity. […]
The standards developed by the ITU, ISO, IEC, and JTC1 (in some cases referred to as “Recommendations”) are considered “International Standards” and are recognized by national administrations around the world and are often referenced in official documents such as treaties (e.g. North American Free Trade Agreement). The standards developed and/or ratified by these International Bodies may be mandated by various governments. As a result, the output of the ITU, ISO, IEC, and JTC1 has significant recognition in trade and are widely referenced by national administrations.
Standards produced by SSOs based in USA also have significant recognition in international trade and are also widely referenced by national administrations throughout the world. There are varying opinions, however, as to whether the standards developed by bodies other than the ITU, ISO, IEC, and JTC1 should be considered “International Standards.” For example, while ASTM International (formerly known as American Society for Testing and Materials or ASTM) has existed for over a hundred years and its standards are widely respected and implemented in every country throughout the world, yet certain national and regional administrations do not recognize ASTM standards as “International Standards.” […]
Regional Bodies
Regional standards developers are similar to international SSOs in that the standards that they develop and/or ratify may be mandated by national administrations in that region. These Regional Bodies often represent a number of countries in a region. An example of a regional SSO is the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) which is recognized by the European Commission and whose standards can be referenced and/or mandated by 27 member nations. […]
In the case of the Western Hemisphere, the Pan American Standards Commission or, in Spanish, La Comisión Panamericana de Normas Técnicas (COPANT), is administrated through the governments of the various countries in the region and provides the standards community in the Americas with a forum to exchange information and views on international standardization activities and coordinate regional positions and input to the ISO and IEC.
National Bodies
Almost every country has some form of National Body to oversee and coordinate its standardization process. This National Body may be a governmental, quasi governmental (such as a trade association with strong input from the government) or a non-governmental body which oversees the country’s standardization process.
In many countries, this National Body is integrated within the governmental agency associated with trade and commerce (for example, a government agency such as Ministry of Commerce) and it is that agency which coordinates official input to the international standardization bodies such as the ISO and IEC. For example, the China Electronics Standardization Institute (CESI) is the official body that coordinates China’s input to the JTC1. […]
Because the ITU is a specialized agency of the United Nations, many countries designate the governmental agency associated with input to the United Nations (such as the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Japan) to be the National Body for standards input into the ITU. In the U.S., the Department of State provides the official input to the ITU in consultation with other related governmental entities (Federal Communications Commission, Department of Homeland Security, etc.) and views from the industry.
Some National Bodies are ostensibly trade associations composed of members from the same nation that are involved in a particular industry sector and which provide input to the international SSOs on behalf of that nation. Such associations may receive oversight from a governmental agency which may have final authority as to what the national position will be with regard to the country’s input to the international SSOs. For example, in Brazil the government is heavily involved in ABINEE (the Brazilian Electrical and Electronics Industry Association) which provides input on behalf of Brazil to the IEC.
Other National Bodies are independent, non-profit entities. An example is the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) in the U.S. ANSI is the national body that provides input to the ISO and IEC on behalf of the U.S. ANSI itself does not develop standards, but rather oversees the standards process, accredits SSOs, and ratifies standards. […]
Consortia
In addition to the formal standards setting bodies, Consortia play a large role in the standards development process. A “Consortium” generally refers to a collaboration of stakeholders with the common goal of the standardization of a specific technology or application. Consortia are often intended to have a global presence, but in some cases their focus is limited to regional or national interests.
There are two general types of Consortia: Special Interest Groups, and large industry collaborations forming associations or alliances (“Alliances”). A Special Interest Group tends to focus on a single standard for a specific technology or industry. The Special Interest Group’s activities are, in most cases, limited to the development and possibly promotion of the standard it is developing. The life cycle of a Special Interest Group is generally short lived and many are often disbanded after the standard is developed. An Alliance, on the other hand, is comprised of members that work collaboratively to develop multiple related standards for a technology. In addition to standardization, the Alliance may offer other programs such as logo and certification programs, marketing and/or promotional events, or training and/or support services related to the technology being standardized. The life cycle of an Alliance may be relatively long since the scope of the technology is far reaching and continues to evolve.
[…]
Special Interest Groups usually are unincorporated and formed through multiparty agreements. There may be different membership levels referred to by different terms such as promoters, adopters, or contributors. As the name implies, promoters usually have the most influence over the development and adoption of the standard. Often, only promoters and contributors may participate in the standard development activities of the Special Interest Group. Furthermore, membership has its privileges and members of a SIG may have exclusive access to the technology or be entitled to certain licensing conditions. Non-members are often denied access to the standards developed and approved by the Special Interest Group, or have limited access to the technology, and in most cases are not subject to any special licensing conditions which are exclusive to the members of the SIG.
Alliances are generally incorporated non-profit organizations consisting of voting and non-voting members. Alliances are governed by a Board of Directors or a similar steering committee and typically form a number of other committees to oversee project management, marketing, and standards development. The committees that develop standards are often referred to as technical committees or technical working groups.
[The Standards Primer document is copyright 2009 Intellectual Property Owners Association; the excerpts used here are provided for educational purposes under a fair use theory. The Creative Commons license cited in the footer of this page does not apply to this text.]
