Twitter Linkedin


In this new section, I will share with you a number of thoughts, reflections and positions that will help you scratching the surface and go beyond my CV…



Innovation has always been the driver of my career, guiding my choices and my attitude.

I am also convinced that innovation does not only mean technology breakthrough. In particular, marketing, user experience and “field experience” are key drivers for innovation.

Indeed, already in my position of Deputy Project Leader at the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission in Italy (from 1993 to 1995), I was involved in the STARS (Software Toolkit for Advanced Reliability and Safety analysis) project. This was my first experience of industrial innovation:

  • The STARS project aimed at developing an integrated set of Computer Aided Reliability Analysis tools for the various tasks involved in systems safety and reliability analysis of industrial systems.
  • The innovation comes from the digital transformation of the safety assessment process, starting from the nuclear industry use case.
  • My role in the project: assistant to the project leader and in charge of the software development.

Then, in Canon Research Centre, France (from 1995 to 2000), I had the chance to address market driven innovation issues related to the intelligent configuration of devices:

  • The objective was to provide innovative technologies to improve the user experience when using computer peripherals such as printers.
  • The vast majority of users are usually using factory settings of the peripherals which, in the case of printers for instance, often gives a very poor result.
  • The idea was then to analyse the information to process by the peripheral (the document in the case of a printer) and configure the peripheral according the result of this analysis so that the information is processed the best way possible.
  • The project focused on the application of the solution developed to printing systems and involved all related R&D and business units in the Canon group.
  • The results are confidential, protected by patents (no publication) and applied into actual products released to the market.
  • My role in the project: I was at the origin of the project idea and was the leader of the project at corporate level (secured corporate budget and corporate sponsorship, supervised technical development, managed IPR strategy, managed marketing strategy).

After that, I took various management positions, driving innovation activities and process in Médiamétrie (CIO), Hitachi Europe (Laboratory Manager), ASIN AW Europe (R&D Director), Magneti Marelli (R&D Manager) and EIT Digital (General Manager of the French operations):

  • in Médiamétrie: Redesign of the telecommunication architecture for audience data download and audience results delivery to the customers: Deployment of a new telecommunication architecture to collect raw data, including a disaster recovery process. Deployment of a new infrastructure for audience results delivery to the customers, including new means of access (e.g. audience results on mobile). Deployment of a new methodology and environment for products development.
    Web sites audience metering products: After the development of a proof of concept and a prototype, release of web site audience measurement tools and services.
    Digital Terrestrial TV audience metering product: Adaptation of the analog TV audience metering solution (hardware, software, infrastructure and statistical model) to address the arrival of the Digital Terrestrial TV offer in France.
  • in Hitachi Europe: in charge of setting-up the strategy, managing the laboratory, managing the relationships with the industrial and academic partners, managing the relationships with the Hitachi Group sponsors (business units and corporate R&D). The laboratory has 3 main lines of research: advanced telecommunication systems, advanced security solutions, advanced ICT infrastructures. The laboratory initiated the first experiments of the Hitachi Group and in Europe of connected vehicles and became the Hitachi Group competence centre in that domain.
  • in AISIN AW Europe: in charge of the management of the European advanced developments team, to foresee the innovations to develop in Europe or to transfer from Japan to develop the European market of the group for the embedded electronics products, in particular the infotainment systems.
  • in Magneti Marelli: in charge of the management of the French site of Magneti Marelli Embedded Electronics Corporate R&D (the other site is in Turin in Italy). The site is in charge of the software development of the innovative products of the group, in particular the infotainment systems.
  • in EIT Digital: in charge of the management of the ICT innovation ecosystem of EIT Digital (French academic and industrial members). Active in the definition of EIT Digital innovation strategy (processes and topics) at European level. Focus on Smart City and Smart Industry domains.

Recently, I decided to take the leap, joining Trustseed, an innovative start-up, developing solutions for the admin-tech. In Trustseed, I am in charge of marketing and innovation activities.

Based on this experience, I sometimes express my point of view or my vision on innovation, posting articles on this website (see below).

My posts related to innovation (frequent updates):


All along my career I had the opportunity to collaborate with a large number of start-ups in order to boost the innovation of the large corporates I was working for.

More recently, during my mandate in EIT Digital, I had the chance to support the development (business development, access to finance, coaching…) of a number of start-ups.  In particular (click the icon to access the start-up website):

At the end of my mandate at EIT Digital, I considered that to have a more complete overview of what is a start-up, I had to join one of them and experience the reality behind the concept and the strategy. This is why I recently joined Trustseed, a start-up in admin-tech, with the mission to boost marketing and innovation activities.

Based on this experience, I sometimes express my point of view or my vision on the start-ups ecosystem and trends, posting articles on this website (see below).

My posts related to start-ups (frequent updates):


Since very early in my career I have occupied strategy setting positions and I demonstrated strong skills in this domain:

  • in Canon: winner of a group level contest (only 1 project selected among 100 proposals group-wide) that gave me the opportunity to launch my own project with Corporate top management sponsorship. Product development strategy at group level to address a business development issue.
  • in Médiamétrie: technology and product development strategy to adapt the company products portfolio to the media market evolution (launch of digital TV, TV on the Internet, audience of websites, …).
  • in Hitachi: setting-up the European laboratory strategy on ICT in order to support business development at group level, Japanese technology on the European market and  partnerships at group level.
  • in AISIN AW Europe: setting-up new products development strategy to support business development in Europe and transfer of Japanese technology on the European market.
  • in Magneti Marelli: setting-up strategy for products development, technology evolution (moving from legacy technology to open-source) and customer acquisition.
  • in EIT Digital: strategy for new partners engagement at French level, partnership strategy with French stakeholders (French Tech, Competitiveness Clusters, Governmental agencies, French government, …), part of the team defining the strategic agenda at European level.

Based on this experience, I sometimes express my point of view or my vision on strategy setting and management, posting articles on this website (see below).

My posts related to strategy (frequent updates):


Because nothing can be achieved alone, I do value collaboration and even more partnership.

I have a deep experience of launching strategic partnerships and I have always been very cautious at maintaining good relationships between the partners.

In particular:

  • in Canon: management of the academic partnership with Telecom Bretagne, a branch of the French engineering school in telecomumication.
  • in Médiamétrie: management of the partnerships with the IT department suppliers, in particular for software development.
  • in Hitachi: management of the industrial and academic partnerships at European level. In particular, I managed the strategic partnership with Fraunhofer FOKUS in Berlin. I also initiated and managed the strategic partnership with Inria and Orange Group in France.
  • in AISIN AW Europe: management of the industrial and academic partnerships at European level..
  • in Magneti Marelli: management of the partnerships with the Embedded Electronics suppliers, in particular for software development.
  • in EIT Digital: management of the French ICT ecosystem partnership. Management of the partnership with French government, French governmental agencies, French universities, French industrial stakeholders. Launching and managing the partnership with ETSI and ANRT (the French National Agency for Research and Technology).

Based on this experience, I sometimes express my point of view or my vision on partnerships setting and management, posting articles on this website (see below).

My posts related to partnerships:


It is important to remember that excellence comes from execution. Indeed, the best strategy is nothing if it is not properly implemented.

It is also important to provide to the people working for you or with you excellent working conditions.

Therefore, I am very sensitive of running operations the best way possible.

My experience in this matter is pretty strong. In particular:

  • in Médiamétrie: managing the IT department and a call centre with 300 call stations.
  • in Hitachi: as general manager, motoring all the activities of the laboratory, including HR, finance and accounting.
  • in Magneti Marelli: managing the Embedded Electronics R&D department in France (120 people). This included budget and HR.
  • in EIT Digital: as general manager, monitoring all the operations of EIT Digital in France, including the 3 sites (Paris, Rennes and Sophi-Antipolis).

Based on this experience, I sometimes express my point of view or my vision on operations setting and management, posting articles on this website (see below).

My posts related to “running operations”:


All along my various experiences, I have been working for different industrial sectors such as, in particular:

  • automotive and transportation: in Hitachi, launching the first experiments of connected vehicles for the group and lauching the intelligent transportation systems activities. In AISIN AW Europe and Magneti Marelli, launching automotive products on the market. In EIT Digital I supervised the Digital City programme, which had a large compoenent focusing on urban mobility.
  • energy, nuclear industry: in JRC, working on nuclear power plants safety assessment. In Hitachi, launching the smart-grid business unit in Europe.
  • industrial IT: in Hitachi, working with industrial IT and storage business divisions in order to define an innovation process.
  • consumer electronics: in Canon, working the optimize the user experience of consumer electronics products.
  • cyber-security: in Trustseed, development of a private blockchain for the securization of digital transactions.
  • admin-tech: in Trustseed, developing a document worflow management system enforcing GDPR, eIDAS and NIS regulations.
  • media: in Médiamétrie, developing new products to measure the audience of DTV and websites.
  • health and wellbeing: in EIT Digital, one of vertical topics addressed in the working program.
  • fintech: in EIT Digital, launching the Digital Finance program. In Trustseed, development of a Digital Bank use case.

Based on this experience, I sometimes express my point of view or my vision on innovation in different sectors of the industry, posting articles on this website (see below).

My posts related to industry:


Standards are an important economical growth factor.

Here I list my experiences of standardization activities and my footprint within standard bodies.
Beyond this list, you can have an idea of how I see the strategic importance and the evolution of these activities:



ISO 9001: during my time in Médiamétrie, I have been in charge of the ISO 9001 certification process and the enforcement of the norm.
ISO 26262: during my time in Magneti Marelli, I was in charge of the ISO 26262 compliance process. This was a request from car manufacturers already at RFI and RFQ levels.


IEEE 802.11p: during my time in Hitachi Europe in Sophia-Antipolis, in parallel to the above activities, I have been involved, together with Hitachi teams in Japan, in the development of routing protocols that are now part of the IEEE 802.11p standard.


IETF MANET: during my time in Hitachi Europe in Sophia-Antipolis, I have been part of a large number of European projects that contributed to the development of the IETF MANET standard. Commercial products have been developed based on these activities. The results have been used in various ETSI Plugtests.


ETSI TC-ITS: during my time in Hitachi Europe in Sophia-Antipolis, I actively participated to the launch of the ETSI Technical Committee on Intelligent Transportation Systems.
ETSI-TIA Project MESA: during my time in Hitachi Europe in Sophia-Antipolis, I have been part of the ETSI-TIA Project MESA ( Project MESA was an international partnership producing globally applicable technical specifications for digital mobile broadband technology, aimed initially at the sectors of public safety and disaster response.
ETSI partnership: in 2014, EIT Digital (named EIT ICT Labs at the time) and ETSI signed a partnership to boost innovation in Europe ( At this time, I was General Manager of the French operations of EIT Digital and, as such, was in charge of managing the partnership.


AFNOR Blockchain Commission: today, in the context of my role within Trustseed, a software editor delivering solutions for the security of digital transactions, I participate to the AFNOR Blockchain Commission having, among other activities, as an objective to federate the French contribution to the ISO/TC307 technical committee on blockchain and distributed ledger technologies.


Car2Car Communication Consortium (C2CCC): during my time in Hitachi Europe in Sophia-Antipolis, I was one of the founding members of the C2CCC ( industrial consortium aiming at defining an industrial de facto standard for the vehicular communication layers and services. I participated to the ETSI-C2CCC Plugtests (


Genivi Alliance: during my time in Magneti Marelli, I represented the group in the Genivi Alliance ( Genivi is a non-for-profit industry alliance committed to driving the broad adoption of open source, In-Vehicle Infotainment (IVI) software and providing open technology for the connected car. The objective of the alliance, driven by automotive trends, is to develop standard interfaces and software that shorten development cycles, speed time to market, and reduce costs for companies adopting and producing automotive solutions.


AUTOSAR: during my time in Magneti Marelli, I represented the group in the Autosar working groups (

Based on this experience, I sometimes express my point of view or my vision on standards, posting articles on this website (see below).

My posts related to standards:


I participated to a number of public funded initiatives such as the European Technology Plaforms or collaborative projects through EC Framework Programmes (FP5, FP6, FP7,



EPoSS ( during my time in Hitachi Europe in Sophia-Antipolis, I was active in the development of the EPoSS platform. In collaboration with Hitachi business divisions in Japan and the European Commission (DG CONNECT) I was mainly engaged into RFID standardization related activities.


3GPP ( during my time in Hitachi Europe in Sophia-Antipolis, in collaboration with Hitachi R&D teams in Japan, I supported ARIB and TTC contributions to 3GPP.
3GPP ( 3GPP is one of the topic supporting the partnership agreement signed between ETSI and EIT Digital (named EIT ICT Labs at the time) ( labs-join-forces-to-boost-ict-innovation-in-europe/).


FIWARE ( during my time in EIT Digital, supporting the deployment and the wide adoption of FIWARE through innovation projects.


Pan-European network of Digital Innovation Hubs ( hubs): during my time in EIT Digital, supporting the development of Digital Innovation Hubs and a number of EC initiatives such as “ICT Innovation for Manufacturing SMEs“ (, “Smart Anything Everywhere“ (


FP2-ESPRIT-BRA2-3085 DRUMS (Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertainty Management Systems) (1989 – 1992)
Coordinator: Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium
Participants: Centre D’estudis Avancais de Blanes, Spain; Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), Rennes, France; Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), Toulouse, France; Imperial Cancer Research Fund (ICRF), United Kingdom; Queen Mary and Westfield College, United Kingdom; Universitat de Granada, Spain; Université d’Aix-Marseille III (Université de Droit d’Économie et des Sciences), France; Université de Paris XI (Université Paris-Sud), France.

FP5-IST-10561 FAIN (Future Active IP Networks) (2002 – 2003)
Coordinator: University College London, United Kingdom
Participants: Eidgenoessische Technische Hochschule Zuerich, Switzerland; France Telecom, France; Fraunhofer Iaf, Germany; Hitachi Europe Limited, United Kingdom; Hitachi, Ltd, Japan; Ikv++ Technologies Ag, Germany; Integrasys, S.A., Spain; Institut Jozef Stefan,Slovenia; National Technical University of Athens, Greece; Siemens Aktiengesellschaft, Germany; T-Systems Nova Gmbh, Germany; Universitat Politecnica De Catalunya, Spain; University of Pennsylvania, United States.
Budget: Total cost: EUR 11,523,278 ; EU contribution: EUR 5,008,000

FP5-IST-37611 6QM (IPv6 QoS Measurement) (2002 – 2005)
Coordinator: Hitachi Europe (France) SA, France
Participants: Consultores Integrales en Telecomunicaciones “Consulintel”, S.L., Spain; France Telecom, France; Fraunhofer Gesellschaft Zur Foerderung Der Angewandten Forschung E.V., Germany; Hitachi, Ltd., Japan.
Budget: Total cost: EUR 2,322,696 ; EU contribution: EUR 964,860

FP6-IST-507646 FLEXINET (Flexible Gateways Architecture for enhanced access network services & applications) (2004 – 2006)
Coordinator: Alcatel SEL AG, Germany
Participants: Apex Concepts and Solutions Ag, Switzerland; Danmarks Tekniske Universitet, Denmark; E-Plus Mobilfunk Gmbh and Co Kg, Germany; Hitachi Europe (France) SA, France; Ibm Research Gmbh, Switzerland; Teletel Telecommunications and Information Technology SA, Greece; University of Patras, Greece; Vodafone – Panafon Anonymi Elliniki Etaireia Tilepikoinonion, Greece.
Budget: Total cost: EUR 4,705,627 ; EU contribution: EUR 2,469,125

FP6-IST-6475 ACCA (Autonomic Communication: Coordination Action) (2004 – 2008)
Coordinator: Fraunhofer Gesellschaft Zur Foerderung Der Angewandten Forschung E.V., Germany
Participants: Centre Suisse d’Electronique et de Microtechnique SA,Switzerland; Hitachi Europe SAS,France; Institut Eurécom, France; Intel Corporation (UK) Limited, United Kingdom; National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece; National University of Ireland, Dublin, Ireland; The Provost, Fellows and Scholars of College of the Holy and Undivided Trinity of Queen Elizabeth, Ireland; Universitaet Basel, Switzerland; Universite Paris VI Pierre et Marie Curie, France; University of Patras, Greece.
Budget: Total cost: EUR 612,166 ; EU contribution: EUR 500,000

FP6-IST-034115 PHOSPHORUS (Lambda user controlled Infrastructure for European Research) (2006 – 2009)
Coordinator: Instytut Chemii Bioorganicznej Pan W Poznaniu, Poland
Participants: Adva Optical Networking AG, Germany; Cesnet, Zajmove Sdruzeni Pravnickych Osob, Czech Republic; Communications Research Centre, Canada; Forschungszentrum Juelich Gmbh, Germany; Fraunhofer Iaf, Germany; Fundacio Privada I2cat, Internet I Innovacio Digital A Catalunya, Spain; Hitachi Europe SAS, France; Interdisciplinair Instituut Voor Reedbandtechnologie VZW, Belgium; MCNC, United States; Nextworks S.R.L., Italy; Nortel Networks B.V., Netherlands; Research Academic Computer Technology Institute, Greece; Research And Education Society In Information Technologies, Greece; Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universitaet Bonn, Germany; Stichting Academisch Rekencentrum Amsterdam (SARA), Netherlands; Surfnet B.V., Netherlands; Universiteit Van Amsterdam, Netherlands; University of Essex, United Kingdom; University of Wales Swansea, United Kingdom.
Budget: Total cost: EUR 6,868,871 ; EU contribution: EUR 5,125,000

FP7-ICT-216404 AUTOI (Autonomic Internet) (2008 – 2010)
Coordinator: Hitachi Europe SAS, France
Participants: Universität Passau, Germany; Universitat Politecnica De Catalunya, Spain; Ginkgo Networks SA, France; Inria, France; Ucopia-Communications, France; Université Pierre et Marie Curie – PARIS 6, France; University of Patras, Greece; Waterford Institute of Technology, Ireland; University College London, United Kingdom.
Budget: Total cost: EUR 3,639,395 ; EU contribution: EUR 2,695,912

FP7-ICT-216269 GEONET (Geoaddressing and Georouting for vehicular communications) (2008 – 2010)
Coordinator: INRIA, France
Participants: Efkon AG, Austria; Lesswire AG, Germany; Fundacion Imdea Networks, Spain; Hitachi Europe SAS, France; Broadbit Hungary Fejleszto es Tanacsado KFT, Hungary; NEC Europe Ltd, United Kingdom; Association Pour La Recherche et Le Developpement des Methodes et Processus Industriels – Armines, France; Ecole Nationale Superieure des Mines de Paris, France.
Budget: Total cost: EUR 2,985,964 ; EU contribution: EUR 1,899,208

FP7-ICT-215350 PRISM (Privacy-aware Secure Monitoring) (2008 – 2010)
Coordinator: Salzburg Research Forschungsgesellschaft M.B.H., Austria
Participants: Ftw Forschungszentrum Telekommunikation Wien Gmbh, Austria; Telscom A.G., Switzerland; Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft Zur Foerderung Der Angewandten Forschung E.V., Germany; Hitachi Europe Sas, France; Institute of Communication and Computer Systems, Greece; Consorzio Nazionale Interuniversitario per le Telecomunicazioni, Italy; Nettare S.R.L., Italy.
Budget: Total cost: EUR 3,152,987 ; EU contribution: EUR 2,300,000

FP7-ICT-224644 iTETRIS (Integrated Wireless & Traffic Platform for Real-Time Road Traffic Management Solutions) (2008 – 2010)
Coordinator: THALES Communications SA, France
Participants: Deutsches Zentrum Fuer Luft – Und Raumfahrt EV, Germany; Universidad Miguel Hernandez de Elche, Spain; Cbt Comunicacion & Multimedia, S.L., Spain; Asociacion De Empresas Tecnologicas Innovalia, Spain; Eurécom, France; Hitachi Europe SAS, France; Comune di Bologna, Italy; Peek Traffic B.V., Netherlands.
Budget: Total cost: EUR 4,462,209 ; EU contribution: EUR 2,968,999

FP7-SECURITY-218123 SECRICOM (Seamless Communication for Crisis Management) (2008 – 2010)
Coordinator: QINETIQ Limited, United Kingdom
Participants: Ardaco, a.s., Slovakia; Bumar Sp. z.o.o., Poland; NEXTEL SA, Spain; Infineon Technologies AG, Germany; Universite du Luxembourg, Luxembourg; Ustav Informatiky, Slovenska Akademia VIED, Slovakia; Technische Universitaet Graz, Austria; GA Drilling AS, Slovakia; ITTI SP ZOO, Poland; BAPCO LBG, United Kingdom; Commissariat à l’Energie Atomique et aux Energies Alternatives, France; Hitachi Europe SAS, France; Panepistimio Patron, Greece.
Budget: Total cost: EUR 12,424,827.51 ; EU contribution: EUR 8,606,568.20

FP7-ICT-224019 PRE-DRIVE-C2X ( European architecture for V2V and V2I communication system) (2008 – 2010)
Coordinator: Daimler AG, Germany
Participants: Technische Universitaet Graz, Austria; Interuniversitair Micro-Electronica Centrum VZW, Belgium; Renesas Electronics Europe Gmbh, Germany; Deutsches Zentrum Fuer Luft – Und Raumfahrt Ev, Germany; Audi Aktiengesellschaft, Germany; BMW Forschung und Technik Gmbh, Germany; Karlsruher Institut Fuer Technologie, Germany; Facit Research Gmbh & Co. Kg, Germany; Ptv Planung Transport Verkehr AG., Germany; European Center for Information and Communication Technologies Gmbh, Germany; Delphi Delco Electronics Europe Gmbh, Germany; Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft Zur Foerderung der Angewandten Forschung E.V., Germany; Universitaet Karlsruhe (Technische Hochschule), Germany; Adam Opel Gmbh, Germany; Volkswagen Ag, Germany; Renesas Technology Europe Gmbh, Germany; Irion Management Consulting Gmbh, Germany; Pbs Projektgruppe Fuer Betriebswirtschaftliche Studien AG, Germany; Sap Ag, Germany; Hitachi Europe SAS, France; Institut National de Recherche sur les Transports et leur Sécurité, France; Centro Ricerche Fiat SCPA, Italy; Nederlandse Organisatie Voor Toegepast Natuurwetenschappelijk Onderzoek – TNO, Netherlands; Volvo Technology AB, Sweden; University of Surrey, United Kingdom; NEC Europe Ltd, United Kingdom
Budget: Total cost: EUR 8,552,176 ; EU contribution: EUR 5,014,999

FUI-10 SCORE@F (Système COopératif Routier Français) (2009 – 2010)
Coordinator: Renault SA, France
– Large corporations: Renault (Project leader), PSA Peugeot Citroën, Orange, Cofiroute, Hitachi, Viveris, Egis Mobility
– SMEs: LAB, UTAC, Intempora, Deveryware, Marben, Neavia, Fareco
– Academics: Eurecom, IFSTTAR, INRIA, Telecom Business School
– Public bodies: Centre d’études Techniques de l’Équipement du Sud-Ouest et de l’Ile de France
– Public authorities: Conseil Général des Yvelines, Conseil Général de l’Isère
Budget: Total cost: EUR 5.6M; Public contribution: EUR 2.7M; Private contribution: EUR 2.9M

FP7-TRANSPORT-247885 COVEL (Cooperative Vehicle Localization for Safe and Sustainable Mobility) (2010 – 2010)
Coordinator: Centro Ricerche Fiat, Italy
Participants: Technische Universitaet Chemnitz, Germany; Hitachi Europe SAS, France; Centre d’Etudes Techniques de l’Equipement du Sud-Ouest, France; Magneti Marelli Sistemi Elettronici S.P.A., Italy; NAVTEQ B.V., Netherlands
Budget : Total cost: EUR 3,455,321 ; EU contribution: EUR 2,118,525

Based on this experience, I sometimes express my point of view or my vision on collaborative projects initiatives, posting articles on this website (see below).

My posts related to collaborative projects:


Beyond my academic time, my main experience of open-source comes from:

  • Magneti Marelli: development of a complete infotainment system for BMW based on an open-source operating system with a realtime overlay.
  • EIT Digital: supporting start-ups to draw a strategy around open-source usage while protecting their intellectual property.

My posts related to open-source:



ICT standards are essential to guarantee the interoperability of technology based products.

They represent therefore significant benefits for the industry, bringing to the manufactured product the capacity to be used globally, where the standards are enforced.

They are also strongly beneficial for the consumers as they avoid the “vendor lock-in“ issue and allow a wide range of choices.

Therefore, the ICT standards represent a major avenue to avoid the digital divide in our society and the deployment of the digital single market.

At the same time, there is no standard for standards.

Indeed the digital transformation of the economy and the society at a global scale is not only impacting the ICT industry, but also all the verticals such as energy, transports, finance, health, manufacturing. It is also impacting cross-sector domains such as Smart-City or Industry-4.0.

Therefore, developing common ICT standards is a must to maintain European competitiveness.

This is supported by the political agenda of the European Union aiming at preserving and enhancing European ICT industry position on a global scale.

Why am I legitimate to act in this context?

I got more than 25 years of experience in the ICT industry, working in R&D and innovation for RTO’s, the European Commission, large international conglomerates, SME’s and even start-ups.

So, I do know what is the day-to-day reality of all the ETSI stakeholders when participating to standardisation activities and when implementing products based on standards.

For instance, for those of you who already drove a Peugeot 208, 308 or 508 and used the SMEG or SMEG+ system (entertainment and the navigation systems), you have to know that this system was designed and developed mainly by my team in Magneti Marelli. Of course, such a system is embedding a large collection of standards, in particular ICT related ones (WiFi, 3G/4G, Bluetooth, USB). It is also compliant with industrial initiatives like Autosar or Genivi Alliance and compliant with international standards at system level (namely ISO-26262).

Already in 2003, with my team in Hitachi, I have been one of the first to experiment car-to-car communication, using WiFi technology, on real roads with conventional cars. Soon after, we were part of the founding members of the ETSI TC-ITS.

So, I believe to be particularly legitimate to understand everyone’s concerns and standardisation strategy, and to make the process and relations more fluid and productive.


Standardisation is a major driver for the European industrial competitiveness.

European standardisation is governed by the legal framework set in the Regulation 1025/2012 and all actors in standardisation (the European Commission,  European standardisation organisations, industry, SME’s and actors of the society) shall follow.

Historically, fora and consortia are at the origin, under the leadership of organisations such as ETSI, of most of the technical specifications deployed in actual standards.

Article 13 of the Regulation allows the Commission to decide which ICT technical solutions to be listed for public procurement. This way, public sector can have access to a wide variety of choices when purchasing ICT equipments, software and services.

This is driving to more competition on the market and mitigates the risk of being tighten-up to proprietary/closed systems.

In this context, the Commission contributes to the financial sustainability and to the operations of the 3 European standardisation organisations:

The European Commission contributes also through collaborative projects under the various Framework Programmes (e.g., H2020). Indeed, the above European standardisation organisations have access to the results produced by these collaborative projects.

Of course, in that context, no competition shall take place between ETSI, CEN and CENELEC as a tight collaboration framework is the unique avenue for success of the European standardisation community as a whole.

In this framework, European SDO’s have a major role to play and shall probably adapt their ways of doing to be more agile and more proactive in enforcing European Union policies while supporting members (mainly the industrial stakeholders) contributions

Why am I legitimate to act in this context?

I am particularly knowledgeable of the European Commission institutions and processes.

Indeed, I worked 2 years for the Joint Research Centre (, I worked 4 years for the European Institute of Innovation and Technology ( and I participated to more than 10 collaborative projects under the various European Commission framework programs (since 1992 with ESPRI Basic Research II, then all programs from FP4 to H2020).

Therefore, I am particularly at ease with these institutions. I know their strengths, their weaknesses and their expectations.


Many studies in the literature are demonstrating that the contribution of standards in the economic growth is almost equivalent as the one of Intellectual Property Right.

The same way, these same studies explain that the benefit generated by standardisation exceeds the ones of companies alone.

Indeed, standards and patents are playing an increasing role in innovation and in knowledge diffusion.

De jure standards have an intrinsic outstanding advantage since they are public, providing to the industrial stakeholders the necessary elements to develop interoperable products, and to a wider community the best framework to support innovation.

On the other hand, patents are made to protect proprietary trade secrets and preserve exclusivity.

This is particularly true in Europe where the “open source”/“free software” communities are pretty strong and where the issue of the “software patents” is still under discussion.

As a consequence, we sometimes witness some conflicting situations opposing IPR and the standardisation process in the working groups. We will address this point in another section below.

Why am I legitimate to act in this context?

During my professional carrier, I did occupy technology development positions, at operational and managerial levels. I also had various responsibilities related to product development, business, marketing and IPR.

Therefore, I know what it means to develop a technical “object” and make it a product within a sustainable business model.

I particular, I know how to avoid the “over-engineering” syndrome and protect industrial property while opening it enough to contribute to standardisation activities.


As we saw above, standards are essential for an steady economical growth as they represent a major innovation booster and supports a fair commercial competition for the benefit of the customers.

Nevertheless, depending on who you are talking to, standards may be viewed as a constraint or an enabler of the innovation process.

Indeed, by construction, standards represent a constraint because, limiting the choice of enabling technologies to develop compliant and interoperable products. So, to a certain extent, it is a desirable constraint, that could be seen as a catalyst 🙂

But, this is only one side of the coin. Indeed, every industrial stakeholder will agree on the fact that there is no way around than being compliant with standard(s) to develop credible products able to reach their market.

The DVD Rewinder came into the market in 2009 and stayed there for less than a year. Would you buy this “product”?

Indeed, only well-designed standards are able to avoid the development of off-market products such as the one above.

Why am I legitimate to act in this context?

Not everyone knows how to transform a technological object into an actual product released on the market. I know how to do it, and I actually did it.

Not everyone knows how to implement and release on the market, at global scale, a product compliant with multiple standards and regulations.
I know how to do it, and I actually did it.

Not everyone knows how to protect innovation through a portfolio of patents, while contributing to standardisation activities and releasing products on the market, at global scale.
I know how to do it, and I actually did it.

Not everyone knows how to use open source platform to develop and release products on the market, while protecting industrial property. I know how to do it, and I actually did it.

I have a pragmatic approach with respect to technology. I do believe that technology for technology is nonsense, and I am particularly cautious about avoiding the “over-engineering” syndrome.


Traditionally, in SDO’s, two main communities are represented: (1) industrial stakeholders that promoting IPR exploitation, and (2) RTO’s that are more willing to promote the use of open source platforms.

Two approaches that may seem antagonist but that must be taken into account anyway by the SDO’s.


Patents are playing an important economical role. This is particularly true in the ICT sector.

At the same time, more and more doubts arise around ICT patents as the predominance of cumulative innovation in ICT is a major concern.

The first important fights around patents and standards came from the European GSM standard , when the cross licensing practices of one particular manufacturer kicked a large numbers of its competitors out of the market.

In reaction to these issues, ETSI (newly founded as an emanation from the GSM consortium) adopted an IPR policy specifying the obligations to disclose essential patents, and to provide licenses on a fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) basis.

This policy is today adopted by most of the main SDOs. The disclosure obligation and the notion of FRAND licensing terms constitute the basis for the emergence of essential patents as a specific legal institution with sui generis obligations and mechanisms.

In December 2010 the European Commission adopted new guidelines for the application of European Competition law to horizontal agreements, including standardisation agreements.

This framework is conditioning the presumption of pro-competitive effects of standardisation upon disclosure policies and FRAND licensing terms.

Even if some debate still exist around this notion, the decisions of the European Commission is emphasising the notion of essential patent as a cardinal regulatory principle for the standardisation of proprietary technology.

Nevertheless, the FRAND scheme is showing its limits and a new initiative shall be launched to define a scheme which is more adequate to today’s technologies.

In particular some specific attention shall be given to this issue when a significant part of the technologies are composed of algorithms and softwares that cannot be protected by patents in Europe, while this is possible in the US and Asia.

This is indeed an issue from a fair competition prospective because of the global footprint of standards and the unbalanced situation that may arise from some members who may be able to get IPR on some technologies outside Europe while European one’s could not directly.

The trick is call the “media claim” technique: it is possible to extract the description of the media supporting the software in a European patent and make it a claim in the extension of that patent in the US for instance. But, the process is long and expensive and the resulting patent is less powerful than a native software US patent.

This brings to the table the discussion around the software patent in Europe.


In a recent post on ETSI blog, the question is clearly posed: “Do we still need standards in the age of open source?”.

Beyond the provocative title, the problem is bluntly explained… open source have very good effects, allowing rapid and frugal developments. However, the interoperability is not guaranteed due to diversity, by nature, of open source platforms.

Indeed, in the open source communities (off which I used to be part of a looooooong time ago), the main driver for decision is excellence from a technology prospective.

The notion of cross-platform interoperability and backward compatibility is indeed not a primary focus. The absence of such a pre-requisite is jeopardizing the capacity to develop long lasting products on the market, unless a fork of the platform, most of the time coming from an industrial stakeholder, is freezing some of these choices and implementing an interoperability layer.

This is where open source and standards can meet.

Remains the issue of the license to apply. Certainly not GPL as it is incompatible with patent applications. Even more problematic is GPL v3 that contaminates all the software components in which it is integrated to, even the proprietary ones.

At the same time, many industrial stakeholders, particularly in the telecommunication sector, are using BSD license since it allows modifications of the source code without the obligation to re-inject it into the community. This makes BSD much more compatible with IPR.

The problem of selecting a particular open source license, is the loss of control. By nature, the open source licenses are in constant evolution with the objective to protect the community and to make the source codes open to the public.

The risk is then to go through the same problem as the GPL community when GPL v3 came to the scene, moving to a license nobody in the industry wants to apply.

I strongly believe that it is hard to find a existing open source license that fits 100% with all stakeholders needs, simply because these licenses have been mostly designed with an objective which is sometimes antagonist with IPR and standardisation core principles.

May be the problem should be tackled by defining a specific open source (I would rather say “community”) license?

But it is a difficult issue that can only be address through discussions and reaching consensus.

Why am I legitimate to act in this context?

To the above mentioned issues, I do not pretend to define the solution only by myself and I strongly believe that a top-down unilateral decision in this particular matter would be a mistake.

My knowledge of IPR strategy and processes is thorough and pragmatic. My IPR “culture” comes from my time is the large Japanese conglomerates, where IPR is a daily preoccupation. Actually, I still hold 10 international patents from my time in Canon.

The same is my knowledge of open source. A long long long time ago I have been part of the Linux community (some of my code may remain in the file system library of one of the first versions of the Linux Slackware distribution). When I was in Magneti Marelli, we did design and develop embedded electronics products, for a German car manufacturer, based on an NVidia fork of a Debian distribution packaged with a additional real-time layer.

Therefore, I am able to easily interact with these 2 communities and bring them to the table to reach a consensus.