OMA - defragmenting the M-COMMERCE space Piecing Together M-Commerce Solutions

1. O P E N M O B I L E A L L I A N C E OMA - defragmenting the M-COMMERCE spacePiecing Together M-Commerce Solutions Submitted To: 3GPP and 3GPP2 Date: 25 September 2004 Availability: Public OMA Confidential Contact: Carl Hayes, Vice Chair, OMA-MCC crhayes@us.ibm.com Source: <OMA Mobile charging and commerce WG> X

2. Headline • Background • Why OMA • Activities to date • Motivation of Activities • Current Work • Relationships

3. Background • Started with the assumptions: • Many organizations doing work in m-commerce area, must be overlap. • Fundamental technical issues being solved differently. • Fundamental Business model is obvious to all. • Everyone will stand and cheer this effort. • Multiple solutions driven by single agendas. • Proprietary solutions and competing standards make Interoperability very difficult if not impossible.Increasing costs, and preventing real market growth. • Absurd statements being made about adoption of m-commerce • Operators need to become banks • Credit Cards to be viewed as obsolete in few years • Banks need to become operators • Charging of digital or metered goods is not m-commerce.

4. Background Reality • Started with the assumptions: • Many organizations doing work in m-commerce area, Little overlap, niche areas of work. • Fundamental technical issues being solved differently Many technical issues being solved. • Fundamental Business model is obvious to all. Multiple business and technology models • Everyone will stand and cheer this effort. Harmonization takes effort and persuasion. • Multiple solutions driven by single agendas. • Proprietary solutions and competing standards make Interoperability very difficult if not impossible.Increasing costs, and preventing real market growth. Some truth but realization of needs from adjunct technologies more enabling. • Absurd statements being made about adoption of m-commerce • Operators need to become banks Financial transaction processing better understood • Credit Cards to be viewed as obsolete in few years Credit cards systems may enable charging • Banks need to become operators Banks want to enable tranactions with appropriate risk. • Charging of digital or metered goods is not m-commerce. M-Commerce has proven to be many things including digital and metered goods

5. Why OMA I(II) • “The mission of the Open Mobile Alliance is to grow the market for the entire mobile industry by removing the barriers to global user adoption and by ensuring seamless application interoperability while allowing businesses to compete through innovation and differentiation. “ • Misunderstanding of a bullet point • “…Be the catalyst for the consolidation of standards fora…”Driving the standardization to the right fora, not bring all work into OMA • The MCC WG is • Looking to create solutions by collaboration and coalescence with existing specifications – read: ”not reinventing the wheel” • Corporation of entire value chain needed for a complete m-commerce solution.

6. Why OMA II(II) • Large representation of the entire Value Chain • Almost 400 members • MNOs, IT vendors, Telephone Equipment Manufacturers, Content Providers, Application Vendors, Financial institutions, Government institutions, Payment Associations • Openness is key to members, though • OMA is for the industries, by the industries • Driven by principles: • Bearer agnostic • Operating System agnostic • Fairness • Concensus • END to END view (IOT testing etc.) • De-Fragmentation, Harmonization, and consolidation where it makes sense • An Understanding that each Value Chain Member has needs

7. Activities to date • A Little History • Much concern about reinventing wheels, tasked with Landscape Evaluation. • Understand the Landscape of M-commerce • Billing/Payments/Charging • Groups, organisations, forums involved,and strengths SWOT • Requirements, or specifications • Areas of Experitse • Components needing to be addressed • Through a step by step approach • Questionnaire, Gap Analysis, Reporting and White Paper and Requirement Gathering

8. Motivation for Activities • Bringing consolidation to landscape • Through a public Landscape report • Show the Big Picture. • Identifies redundant, or better, overlapping work • A Gap Analysis to show areas to address which would complete an End to End OMA solution. • Identified area of high priority in solving Charging for OMA enablers • Goal is interoperability among Landscape and within OMA • Find the common components within this landscape • Through a definable process with specific models, identify groups/organizations and the work they bring to the puzzle. • Drive concensus amoung value chain players within the Landscape • Create solutions for OMA which allow the enablement on m-commerce components • Current “short time goal” create a charging enabler which provide a set rules for other OMA enablers on how to interface with charging infrastructures.

9. Current work • Looking at September 1 2004 slice in time • Additional Landscape participants and maturity of work requires refinement of Landscpae Report. • OMA Work Items • Requirement work for charging – becoming basis for a charging enabler • Charging as a common (horizontal) function agreement • Architectural consistency work as part of the “OMA AD” • Specific to 3GPP and 3GPP2 notion of work split with OMA • Proactive engagement with OMA groups to ensure requirements and Use Cases are understood.

10. Relationships • Formal Liaisons related to MCC • MPF, PayCircle, Mobey, 3GPP, MeT, 3GPP2, ETSI, TMF • OMA Internal • TP, Requirements, Architecture, Security, Gaming, Web services, Download, Location, Presense ..... • Open communication • E.g. The distributed Questionnaire • The Landscape Report, this be continue to be updated. • Where IPR is not a factor …. SHARE. • Upcoming workshop with 3GPP and 3GPP2