The governance of web standards. Economic struggles in the XML case

Abstract

Our communication would present a new version of a paper on the bargaining process of web XML standards we presented in Hyderabad. This version presents new results and deeper analyses, particularly about the relations between open source initiatives and CS industries. Our case is based on the work done in World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) arenas, and then in ISO. Processing the 8 main mailing lists, constituted of more than 21000 mails, has led us to analyze the standard-making process through the bargaining habits and networks of actors who take part in it. It often appears that institutions interacting the most with others directly take part in the writing of final texts, and that firms often intend (and manage !) to play a leading role in this work. In our case study, the whole process from the W3C common work to the ISO struggle illustrates the ambiguity of transnational private governance: on the one hand, competition between firms is only made possible by cooperative work. On the other hand, such a relation shows its limits when firms try to convert web standards into software standards which could become quasi-monopolistic on software markets in the future. Unsurprisingly, the limits of ‘coopetition’ is marked by conflicts and harsh industrial competition, which impose arbitrations , such as ISO. This generates both inflexions in transnational private governance and deep transformations in the traditional inter-agency pattern of standardization. In this study, we examine forum shifting from the W3C to ISO as a critical matter for many contemporary economic patterns of standardization, and we go back to classical explanations rooted in the Schumpeterian perspective of destruction-creation processes and monopolies. We think that the study of web standards, as well as of IP standards, is of particular importance for everyone who gets interested in internet governance.