The GSM Association has thrown the latest punch in the back-and-forth fight over the licensing fees for the OMA DRM standard, saying the revised terms offered by licensing firm MPEG LA are “still unacceptable”.

The GSMA press release is an interesting bit of posturing — it says it’s received 14 proposals for alternate DRM solutions, and it also says the group’s board is “frustrated by the lack of transparency surrounding the details and structure of IPR that MPEG LA considers ‘essential’,” leading members to question the patents’ validity.

The Open Mobile Alliance, of course, has distanced itself from MPEG LA, and while it’s true that OMA has no control over the patents themselves or the terms under which they’re licensed, it needs to accept some responsibility for trying to standardize on a DRM technology that’s proving such a mess to license. The point of OMA was to develop open standards so that the industry didn’t fragment on each and every service and feature, and OMA members are required to give non-exclusive licenses for their relevant intellectual property “on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms and conditions” — the problem being two of the five companies holding relevant patents aren’t OMA members. OMA’s membership roster is a veritable who’s-who of the tech world, so it’s hard to believe the group couldn’t find a suitable technology from within the organization.

The likely outcome of all of this is that the mobile music market will mimic the fragmentation of the wired digital music market, at least in the short term. But it also leaves an opening for another DRM vendor — perhaps OMA member Microsoft? — to step in, likely circumventing OMA through the GSM Association. Consumers don’t particularly like any DRM, so it’s not so important whose flavor is chosen, just that the issue is settled soon so the market can move forward.