EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

12.18.07

Bruce Byfield’s One-sided Piece on GNOME and OOXML

Posted in ECMA, Formats, GNOME, GNU/Linux, GPL, Microsoft, Open XML, Patents at 10:50 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Bruce Byfield has just published another article about the recent frictions that involve GNOME over its involvement in OOXML ‘hardening’. It is very obvious from this articles whose side he takes, just as Sam Varghese recently suggested. To quote him again:

Sadly, Schestowitz hardly got a word in edgeways. He found himself up against Waugh, Miller and Bruce Byfield (also from Linux.com – both Byfield and Miller were quite obviously biased towards Waugh’s point of view), and also Miguel de Icaza, the co-founder of the GNOME project, who phoned in and was allowed to stay on and speak whenever he felt so inclined.

Anyway, that’s old news, and almost nothing new is presented in this newer article (shades of Peter Galli from eWeek). Bruce still refuses to consider Microsoft is a factor despite seemingly infinite evidence. Moving ahead, let’s consider software patents again.

As repeated many time before, OOXML is a patent time bomb and it is incompatible with the GNU GPL.

The next time you ponder OOXML, think about Novell’s software patent deal with Microsoft. Ask yourself:

Using OOXML, am I ‘protected’ and therefore permitted to save my documents, on my computer, with my program (Free software is owned, as opposed to ‘rented’ using a licence). Is that even possible?

If the answer is no, which it probably is, then you know for a fact that OOXML is a proprietary format that embodies other types of risk.

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

10 Comments

  1. rfrdt45 said,

    December 19, 2007 at 7:34 am

    Gravatar

    You’re a nutter.

  2. Bruce Byfield said,

    December 19, 2007 at 1:13 pm

    Gravatar

    Roy:

    Why do you have the idea that anyone who is not in complete agreement with you is against you?

    I start the article by saying that “The tragedy of this controversy is not just that it is divisive, but that each side has a point,” and I grant points on both sides. Yet somehow you don’t seem to mention either of these facts.

    Instead, you seem more concerned that I don’t support your conspiracy ideas. You seem far more concerned with proving the Microsoft connection than you do with findng solutions to the situation.

    I don’t mind that you disagree with me. But can you at least do me the courtesy of disagreeing with what I actually said?

    - Bruce Byfield

  3. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 19, 2007 at 2:35 pm

    Gravatar

    Bruce,

    This wasn’t intended to be disrespectful. However, describing things as “conspiracies” is often a way of just writing them off. We’re talking about possible involvements here of people with conflicting interests (at the Foundation).

    You know that you that I respect you a lot, Bruce. I wrote this item because I didn’t feel that both sides were fairly (and equally) represented. This wasn’t the first time, either.

  4. Bruce Byfield said,

    December 19, 2007 at 4:56 pm

    Gravatar

    Roy,

    I would be interested in hearing how you think the article could be more neutral. I acknowledge points on both sides, and suggest that both sides should modify their behavior and look for solutions rather than continue their antagonism.

    Other feedback suggests that it largely succeeds in being balanced, but if you think a particular point was misrepresented, you would do everyone a service by listing them.

    As for the use of “conspiracy,” what else would you call allegations of Microsoft, Novell, and the GNOME Foundation secretly getting together to promote OOXML? That sounds like a conspiracy to me.

  5. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 19, 2007 at 5:48 pm

    Gravatar

    Bruce,

    The headline of the article, in my humble opinion, is already an insinuation that there is a problem with critics. This isn’t about Jeff’s “half-truths” about myself because the criticism flows in a single direction.

    In a previous article, which was published in Linux.com, there was a headline that suggests “there’s no problem, nothing to see here, please move along”. Jeff and I never reached an agreement on the issue, but the article made it seem like the issue had been resolved.

    I would like to add that, just as I continue to discover each day, Microsoft is still paying for people’s love and that includes Open XML (OOXML).

    As a general remark, about Microsoft being irrelevant to GNU/Linux, I suggest you read about proxies Microsoft has used to launch lawsuits against Linux. As long as they attack Linux, I refuse to ignore what they are up to. Maybe that relates to Gates’ “Keep your enemies closer” advice and Andy Groves’ ““Only the paranoid survive“. I didn’t use to care about Microsoft, but the deeper I look inside Linux, the more often I find Microsoft’s involvements. They leave fingerprints. The Mandriva story in Nigeria is a good and recent example.

  6. Bruce Byfield said,

    December 20, 2007 at 2:44 pm

    Gravatar

    Roy:

    Your reading of the the titles is strange. The reference to half-truths colliding in the title of the Datamation article clearly suggests that the half-truths are on both sides.

    As for the other title, read in context of the article, it refers to the fact that both sides have a belief that what they are doing is right — but disagree on what “right” means in this situation. Anyway, even if read as you suggest, it doesn’t show bias against your position.

    As for your other comments, they have no relation to the Datamation article. Insofar as they refer to opinions that I’ve expressed in the past, they only show that you have failed to read my opinion accurately.

    What is missing from most of what you say is the sort of proof that would be needed in a legal case, or for a news source to publish and not get sued. In other words, you are dealing in supposition. They are interesting suppositions, and I take note of them, but mostly they are not credible.

    Even more to the point, in the case of the GNOME Foundation’s actions, they can only harm any attempt to modify or change what is happening. It would be much more to the point to concentrate on what the Foundation has actually been doing because that, unlike the chain of suppositions you have tried to build, is undeniable and can’t be used to discredit your beliefs.

    Incidentally, I can’t help smiling at the fact that, while you are busy accusing me of bias against your side, GNOME Foundation supporters are accuasing me of bias against their side. And they are just as wrong about my opinions as you are.

  7. htrztr said,

    December 20, 2007 at 4:48 pm

    Gravatar

    For Roy, acknowledging that that the _other_ side (GNOME foundation) might also have a point is already ‘not neutral’. In other words, his truth is the only truth and who is not for him is against him. That’s what its like with religious extremists…

    Reminds me of Bush. These extremists are a shame for the whole of our community; certainly their understanding of ‘freedom’ is not mine. Roy, think of the words of Rosa Luxemburg: “Freedom always means the freedom of those who disagree with you.”

    Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from a known (eet), pseudonymous, nymshifting, abusive Internet troll that posts from open proxies and relays around the world.

  8. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 20, 2007 at 6:15 pm

    Gravatar

    htrztr,

    It is more complicated than this, for starters, to use an example from yesterday, there are some who are paid to agree or disagree. In other words, there is truth and there is truth for one’s wallet on the other hand. That, by the way, applies to Bush as well (since you brought this up). Truth is earned, not paid for (and there are no insinuations here, unless we’re talking about Novell).

  9. 9e9e9t9 said,

    December 21, 2007 at 8:28 am

    Gravatar

    Nonsense. You couldn’t make a single case of bribery stick.

    If by ‘paid’ you mean that M$ does PR work — this is what every company does; GET OVER IT!

    Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from a known (eet), pseudonymous, nymshifting, abusive Internet troll that posts from open proxies and relays around the world.

  10. Roy Schestowitz said,

    December 22, 2007 at 6:02 pm

    Gravatar

    Bruce,

    To say more on the use of the word “conspiracy”, watch the first 30 seconds of the following video (not that I condone its message):

    In recent news, China imprisoned bloggers, putting in mental institutes because they blogged about the government. How familiar a technique to shoot the messenger. In Russia (also recently), journalists were accused of copyrights infringements and send to jail if they wrote critically about the government.

What Else is New


  1. Links 17/6/2018: Linux 4.18 RC1 and Deepin 15.6 Released

    Links for the day



  2. To Keep the Patent System Alive and Going Practitioners Will Have to Accept Compromises on Scope Being Narrowed

    35 U.S.C. § 101 still squashes a lot of software patents, reducing confidence in US patents; the only way to correct this is to reduce patent filings and file fewer lawsuits, judging their merit in advance based on precedents from higher courts



  3. The Affairs of the USPTO Have Turned Into Somewhat of a Battle Against the Courts, Which Are Simply Applying the Law to Invalidate US Patents

    The struggle between law, public interest, and the Cult of Patents (which only ever celebrates more patents and lawsuits) as observed in the midst of recent events in the United States



  4. Patent Marketing Disguised as Patent 'Advice'

    The meta-industry which profits from patents and lawsuits claims that it's guiding us and pursuing innovation, but in reality its sole goal is enriching itself, even if that means holding science back



  5. Microsoft is Still 'Cybermobbing' Its Competition Using Patent Trolls Such as Finjan

    In the "cybersecurity" space, a sub-domain where many software patents have been granted by the US patent office, the patent extortion by Microsoft-connected trolls (and Microsoft's 'protection' racket) seems to carry on; but Microsoft continues to insist that it has changed its ways



  6. Links 16/6/2018: LiMux Story, Okta Openwashing and More

    Links for the day



  7. The EPO's Response to the Open Letter About Decline in Patent Quality as the Latest Example of Arrogance and Resistance to Facts, Truth

    Sidestepping the existential crisis of the EPO (running out of work and issuing many questionable patents with expectation of impending layoffs), the PR people at the Office choose a facts-denying, face-saving 'damage control' strategy while staff speaks out, wholeheartedly agreeing with concerned stakeholders



  8. In the United States the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, Which Assures Patent Quality, is Still Being Smeared by Law Firms That Profit From Patent Maximalism, Lawsuits

    Auditory roles which help ascertain high quality of patents (or invalidate low-quality patents, at least those pointed out by petitions) are being smeared, demonised as "death squads" and worked around using dirty tricks that are widely described as "scams"



  9. The 'Artificial Intelligence' (AI) Hype, Propped Up by Events of the European Patent Office (EPO), is Infectious and It Threatens Patent Quality Worldwide

    Having spread surrogate terms like “4IR” (somewhat of a 'mask' for software patents, by the EPO's own admission in the Gazette), the EPO continues with several more terms like “ICT” and now we’re grappling with terms like “AI”, which the media endlessly perpetuates these days (in relation to patents it de facto means little more than "clever algorithms")



  10. Links 15/6/2018: HP Chromebook X2 With GNU/Linux Software, Apple Admits and Closes a Back Door ('Loophole')

    Links for the day



  11. The '4iP Council' is a Megaphone of Team UPC and Team Battistelli at the EPO

    The EPO keeps demonstrating lack of interest in genuine patent quality (it uses buzzwords to compensate for deviation from the EPC and replaces humans with shoddy translators); it is being aided by law firms which work for patent trolls and think tanks that propel their interests



  12. Grünecker, Hoffmann Eitle, Maiwald and Vossius & Partner Find the Courage to Express Concerns About Battistelli's Ugly Legacy and Low Patent Quality

    The astounding levels of abuse at the EPO have caused some of the EPO's biggest stakeholders to speak out and lash out, condemning the Office for mismanagement amongst other things



  13. IAM Concludes Its Latest Anti-§ 101 Think Tank, Featuring Crooked Benoît Battistelli

    The attack on 35 U.S.C. § 101, which invalidates most if not all software patents, as seen through the lens of a Battistelli- and Iancu-led lobbying event (set up by IAM)



  14. Google Gets Told Off -- Even by the Typically Supportive EFF and TechDirt -- Over Patenting of Software

    The EFF's Daniel Nazer, as well as TechDirt's founder Mike Masnick, won't tolerate Google's misuse of Jarek Duda's work; the USPTO should generally reject all applications for software patents -- something which a former Commissioner for Patents at the USPTO seems to be accepting now (that such patents have no potency after Alice)



  15. From the Eastern District of Texas to Delaware, US Patent Litigation is (Overall) Still Declining

    Patent disputes/conflicts are increasingly being settled outside the courts and patents that aren't really potent/eligible are being eliminated or never brought forth at all



  16. Links 13/6/2018: Cockpit 170, Plasma 5.13, Krita 4.0.4

    Links for the day



  17. When the USPTO Grants Patents in Defiance of 35 U.S.C. § 101 the Courts Will Eventually Squash These Anyway

    Software/abstract patents, as per § 101 (Section 101) which relates to Alice Corp v CLS Bank at the US Supreme Court, are not valid in the United States, albeit one typically has to pay a fortune for a court battle to show it because the patent office (USPTO) is still far too lenient and careless



  18. Buzzwords and Three-Letter Acronyms Still Abused by the EPO to Grant a Lot of Patents on Algorithms

    Aided by Microsoft lobbying (with its very many patent trolls) as well as corrupt Battistelli, the push for software patenting under the guise of "artificial intelligence" ("AI") carries on, boosted by Battistelli's own "Pravda" (which he writes for), IAM Magazine



  19. The United States is Far Better Off With the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), So Why Do Lawyers Attack It?

    The anti-PTAB lobby (which is basically the pro-troll or pro-litigation lobby) continues to belittle and insult PTAB, having repeatedly failed to dismantle it; in the meantime PTAB is disarming several more patent trolls and removing from the system patents which were granted in error (as well as the associated lawsuits)



  20. Links 12/6/2018: Neovim 0.3 and Wine 3.10

    Links for the day



  21. Corrupt Benoît Battistelli Promotes Software Patents in IAM's Patent Trolls-Funded Event in the United States

    With less than 3 weeks remaining for Battistelli's term he engages in gross revisionism, lobbying, and even looting of the patent office



  22. The EPO's 'Expert' Georg Weber is Still Advocating Software Patents in Europe (But He Disguises Them Using Buzzwords)

    The EPO's overzealous support for software patents continues unabated while the European Parliament looks the other way; this is part of the plan to expand patent scope in Europe and flood the continent with low-quality patents (causing a ruinous litigation boom like in China)



  23. Battistelli's EPO is Outdoing North Korea When It Comes to Propaganda and Abuses Against Staff

    Battistelli’s ‘scorched Earth’ approach — his sole legacy at the EPO — has left many workers in mental breakdowns (if not dead), but to celebrate the ‘Battistelli years’ three weeks before the end of his term the Office issues new propaganda material (pertaining exclusively to the Battistelli years, 2010 to 2018) while Battistelli-leaning media offers ‘cover’



  24. IPBC, a Patent Trolls-Funded Event of IAM, is Advancing the Attacks on Section 101/Alice

    Andrei Iancu preaches to the litigation 'industry' in an event (lobbying opportunity) organised by the patent trolls' lobby, IAM



  25. PTAB Carries on Undeterred and Unabated, Courts Are Becoming Less Tolerant of Low-Quality Patents

    With the shift away from the Eastern District of Texas (EDTX) and with PTAB applying growing levels of scrutiny to patents the likelihood that abstract patents will endure at the patent office or the courts is greatly diminished



  26. Apple v Samsung Not Over, Hearing on a New Design Patent Trial Next Month

    Apple's legal battles against phones that have Linux inside them simply aren't ending; meanwhile, there's more evidence that Apple would be wise to simply push for patent reforms, namely further restrictions on patent scope



  27. Links 11/6/2018: Qt 5.9.6 and Weblate 3.0.1 Released

    Links for the day



  28. Latest Docket Reports Show That the American Courts/Legal System Still Anything But Patents-Hostile

    "Damages" (or so-called 'harm') from patent infringement, as demonstrated in the US earlier this month, still an overrated concept which leads to overinflated "compensation" for infringement; the patent microcosm's claims that US courts have become "anti-patent" are laughable at best



  29. Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe Blind to Its Participation in a Scam Around Patents on Nature

    For over $20,000,000 (so far) the Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe has agreed to pretend that it has something to do with controversial patents of Allergan, in effect grossly abusing the concept of tribal immunity while at the same time enabling privatisation of nature



  30. Post-AIA, Post-Alice/§ 101 USPTO Still Granting Software Patents in Defiance of the (Case)Law

    The patent microcosm, which looks for new ways to patent algorithms (in spite of Alice), actually dooms the US patent system by filling it up with invalid patents — software patents that are just waiting to be thrown out by courts which can better assess subject matter (no financial incentive to grant aplenty)


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts