Open Malaysia

The shenanigans of Microsoft being played worldwide is now coming to light. Even after the last vote on the approval of Fast Tracking Microsoft Office OpenXML (MSOOXML) is cast tomorrow (2nd of September 2007), we will hope to see more evidence of stacking of committees.

The Swedengate episode, where Microsoft was caught red-handed in manipulating the composition of the technical committee (TC) responsible for the MSOOXML decision has some implications.

1. It shows that Microsoft is actively playing the system and using its reseller network in flooding TCs worldwide
2. Although direct funding of this activity is illegal, and duly recognised by Microsoftie Jason Matusow, Microsoft has promised a more indirect 'marketing assistance' to its Business Partners who contribute in promoting Microsoft's interests
3. The Swedish Institute of Standards (SiS) subsequent retraction of its "Approval" of MSOOXML due to voting irregularities, to just "Abstain" has significance. It shows a small reaction against a one vendor manipulation of the process
4. Neighbouring countries (e.g. Denmark and Norway), and National Bodies worldwide, with high integrities to maintain, will have to follow suit in investigating the compositions of their TCs, and the justification of their ISO ballot decisions.
5. Disenchanted committee members of TCs who have first hand knowledge, will have the courage to report the corruption of their nations TCs, either via blogs or forums like groklaw or noooxml, or even via the press.
6. ISO themselves will have to redraft rules and regulations on allowing parties with direct vested interests in allowing decisions on standards. Commercial affiliations and bias must be scrutinized.

This is a commentary on Microsoft's attempt at "stacking the committee" in Malaysia.

In December 2006, the Malaysian Technical Committee for E-Commerce (TC4) was considering the adoption of the OpenDocument Format (ODF) or ISO 26300 as a National Standard. We received many comments from the public with great support from a wonderful cross-section of the Malaysian IT community; from governmental bodies, NGOs, consumer groups, universities, professional associations, private enterprises, developers and end users. The resistance only came from Microsoft Business Partners, who wrote in using a pretty much standard template in "protest".

Unlike elsewhere in the world (e.g. US: INCITS), these Public comments are not available to the public, so it is not available on the SIRIM web site.

New nominees

What was interesting at the end of the meeting, the SIRIM management received a request to nominate five new representatives to join TC4's membership. SIRIM correctly commented that there already exists a large number of members at TC4. After reading the list, I noticed that the nominees corresponded directly to the companies that wrote in the Public Comments against ODF!

I pointed this out to the Microsoft representative present, and asked "Is it true that these nominees are Microsoft Business Partners?" He looked abashed and did not answer. Fortunately on that day, we were graced with the presence of Microsoft's Managing Director, Yasmin Mahmood! It was quite an honour that such a high level executive would spend quality time (over 4 hours) at a technical discussion at TC4. So I asked her the same question, and she diplomatically responded "Well, its hard for me to know, as Microsoft has over 2000 business partners in Malaysia ..."

Well, after reviewing the nominees, we know, and they all have direct commercial affiliations with Microsoft.

Re composition of TC4

In late December 2006, these nominations went up to the Industry Standards Committee for IT (ISC-G), to which TC4 is answerable to. What happened next was interesting. Because ISC-G is represented by Government Ministries and renowned Industry associations, they wisely decided that TC4 was already unnecessarily large, and instead of adding new members, they culled the membership list.

All vendors were relegated as non voting, or "co-opted" members. This meant that Microsoft, IBM and other vendors can only contribute their expertise to TC4 but not vote. This made TC4 completely vendor neutral, unbiased and most importantly with only Malaysia's interests at heart.

One nominee however made it to the membership list, as the association appeared to be neutral. Its biase became evident when TC4 had to vote on the Fast Tracking contradiction period for MSOOXML in February, this new member was the only member, despite the overwhelming evidence against MSOOXML in its contradiction with other standards, voted "FOR" Microsoft. The remaining 9 members voted against fast tracking MSOOXML. The representative for the association also happens to be a Microsoft business partner.

Having an affiliation with a vendor may not be a problem if one shows objectivity and rationality. However when presented with the technical facts against a draft standard, responsible committee members should not blindly vote according to their commercial allegiances. To do so makes a TC ineffective especially when consensus is sought. Fortunately "full consensus" was not required for the February vote.

So is alls well in Malaysia?

The composition of the TC4 is close to ideal. ISC-G has Malaysia's interests at heart too. However as we all know, TC4 was suspended in March 2007. The official reasons have been conflicting. The off the cuff explanation provided by the then SIRIM CEO Datuk Dr Arifin Aton has been confusing as it differs to the reasons provided internally.

The Malaysian TC4 could not deliberate on the MSOOXML 5 month ballot effectively, wasting the resources available to SIRIM to provide an educated and well researched opinion. Leveraging on its own resources from TC4 normal and co-opted members should have been the only way to derive a position especially on contentious issues such as MSOOXML.

Hopefully this will all change with the new incoming SIRIM CEO, Ir Yahya Ahmad. He steps in today.

Is alls well in YOUR country?

If you have found manipulations of your technical committee by one vendor to push the one agenda through ISO, please do not be afraid to blog about it, or tell the press.

Many have already done so in Italy, Spain, France, Kenya, Azerbaijan, Finland, Switzerland, Germany, Netherlands, Norway, Denmark,  Portugal and many many more.

The contribution will help identify National Bodies which require policy changes with respect to commercial interests in matters of standards.

It will also bring awareness that some votes are not representative of its countries interests.

More importantly it will help ISO realise that there are problems with its current processes, and pro-actively fixing it will only make ISO more resilient to these attacks, and ever more relevant in IT matters.

yk.