First my usual required disclaimer.
I am not a lawyer, I am not connected with the UCC,
and that my statements and/or opinions are correct to the best of my knowledge.
EDITORIAL relating to Unjust Licensing Feees
It is certainly true that the UCC has expanded in many, many areas. The expansion cost a lot of money but there is no doubt in my mind that the expansion will benefit all of us in the long run.
The 2005 UCC brochure states: For more than three decades, the Uniform Code Council has championed business standards, new technologies and global cooperation in order to bring the world's supply chains together under one global language of business.
Today, that vision has become a reality with six pioneering entities and one globally-recognized name that represents standards-based solutions that are universally open, industry-driven and globally endorsed.
EPCglobal, RosettaNet, UCCnet, and EAN.UCC are just some of the areas the UCC has expanded into in the past few years.
The problem is that the expansion, including the highly paid executives, has been paid for with revenues from the U.P.C. prefix licensing and annual fees. Even this could be acceptable if those who are least likely to benefit from these new endeavors were not saddled with costs they cannot afford. I am speaking about the small user or fledgling entrepreneur.
A U.P.C. number is required even when a single product, such as a new BBQ sauce, a single music CD, or a hand made doll and the like, are brought to the market. Most retail outlets will not accept any product unless it has a scannable U.P.C. symbol. The attitude taken by the mass retailers in conjunction with the present oppressive fee schedule is tantamount to restraint of trade in my opinion.
I believe that the licensing of U.P.C. prefixes should be broken off into a separate organization or division with the revenues derived from the licensing to be used only for the support of that division. This division of course would also have be responsible for the specification, education, tools and anything else specific to the U.P.C. The small entrepreneur through licensing fees should not have to support long range plans such as RFID and the like. This is a burden they cannot bear when starting out. The larger companies that will benefit most from the other endeavors should support that work either by a separate fee of by making donations.
March 2005 UCC Fee Schedule
per number
per numberI understand why the UCC executives who are compensated with millions of dollars do not understand the plight of a company just starting out. To the executives a few thousands dollars a year is just pocket money. To the new company it is often a make or break expense. I hope some law firm reads this and decides to take up the cause. I would propose the following fee schedule which is still regressive but takes into account quantity discounts to reflect the fact that it costs more to maintain ten 10 number accounts than one 100 number account.
A more reasonable Fee schedule
per number
per numberGeorge J. Laurer March 2005
Please, comments and suggestion are requested. All will be acknowledged and some will be posted here.
Return to HOME page.
For contact information please go to my Contact Page.
Revised: March 2005