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. Microsoft's Patent Troll Intellectual Ventures Still Suing Microsoft's Rivals, Microsoft Gags Its Staff Regarding Patent Matters

    Microsoft says it's pursuing "truce"; the patent trolls it has created and backed (Bill Gates still backs them at a personal capacity) feel differently



  2. The EPO Under António Campinos Has Opened More Doors to Software Patents and Only Litigators Are Happy

    António Campinos continues Battistelli's tradition of shredding the Convention on the Grant of European Patents (EPC); it's all about generating as much assertion (e.g. litigation, shakedown) activity as possible, serving to bring Europe's productive industries to a halt



  3. German Court on UPC Constitutional Complaint: “No Oral Hearing is Currently Scheduled. A Decision Date is Not Foreseeable at Present.”

    More bad news for Team UPC as there's no sign of Germany signing/ratifying the UPCA and none of the underlying issues (noted in the complaint) have been addressed at all



  4. Links 22/10/2018: New Kernel Release and Linus Torvalds is Back in Charge

    Links for the day



  5. Lack of Patent Quality Means Lack of Patent Validity and Lack of Legal Certainty

    35 U.S.C. § 101 at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) -- like the European Patent Convention (EPC) on the Grant of European Patents -- stresses patent quality and scope; will patent offices get things right before it's too late or too expensive to undo?



  6. Data Engine Technologies (DET) Just One Among Many Microsoft-Connected Patent Trolls That Pick on Microsoft's Biggest Competitors

    Lawyers' articles/blog posts continue to obscure the fact that Data Engine Technologies is merely a satellite or unit (one among many) of patent trolling giant Acacia Research Corp., connected to Microsoft and sporting a long history of lawsuits against GNU/Linux



  7. Alice/Mayo and Hatch-Influenced US Patent Office

    The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) seems to be serving those who pay the most to define the scope or limits of patenting; this means that even nature and life are being 'privatised' (or turned into someone's "intellectual" property)



  8. Funded by the Public to Prey on the Public: The Absurdity of Patent Sales and 'Enforcement' by Government

    Government or US Government-funded entities are looking to tax private companies using patents that were actually funded by the public; in practice this helps private firms or insiders (individuals) personally gain from something that the public subsidised and should thus be in the public domain



  9. Lockpath Patents Demonstrate That the US Patent Office -- Unlike US Courts -- Keeps Ignoring 35 U.S.C. § 101/Alice

    35 U.S.C. § 101 isn’t being entirely followed by examiners of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO); in fact, evidence suggests that mathematics are still becoming monopolies of private firms — something which should never happen



  10. The Eastern District of Texas and Its Patent Trolls Affinity Not a Solved Issue

    The American patent system continues to distribute monopolies on algorithms and some of these cause litigation to reach courts that are notorious for intolerance of 35 U.S.C. § 101, resulting in unnecessary payments to lawyers and patent trolls



  11. More 'Blockchain' Nonsense in Pursuit of Bogus, Nonsensical Software Patents

    The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is still granting abstract software patents because words like "blockchain" get mentioned in the applications; companies that do this hope to shield themselves from disruptive technology and possibly facilitate future patent blackmail



  12. A Warning About MPEG-G, the Latest Software Patents Trap That Threatens Innovation Everywhere

    Combining patents on software and on life, MPEG-G assembles a malicious pool with malignant ramifications for bioinformatics



  13. MIT and the Prior Art Archive Perpetuate Existing Problems

    Large companies with many tens of thousands of patents (each) would have us believe that broadening access/reach of prior art (e.g. to patent examiners) would solve the issues; This may very well work for these large companies, but it overlooks the broader picture



  14. Links 20/10/2018: Mesa 18.2.3 Released, FreeBSD 12.0 Beta 1

    Links for the day



  15. Unified Patents Demolishes Some More Notorious Patent Trolls and Offers Bounties to Take Down More of Them

    Even though the new management of the US patent office treats patent trolls as a non-issue, groups that represent technology firms work hard to improve things (except for the litigation zealots)



  16. The Identity Crisis of the European Patent Office, Wrongly Believing It Exists to Serve Lawyers and Patent Trolls Outside Europe

    The European Patent Office doesn’t even feel like it’s European anymore; it’s just an international patent office that happens to be based (primarily) in Munich; insiders and outsiders alike need to ask themselves what these ‘European’ officials (employing firms outside Europe) have turned the Office into



  17. Links 19/10/2018: OpenBSD 6.4 and OpenSSH 7.9 Released

    Links for the day



  18. Ingve Björn Stjerna Has Just Warned That If Team UPC and the European Patent Office Rigged the Proceedings of the German Constitutional Court, Consequences Would be Significant

    The EPO is back to mentioning the Unified Patent Court and it keeps making it abundantly clear that it is only working for the litigation 'industry' rather than for science and technology (or "innovation" as they like to euphemise it)



  19. Links 18/10/2018: New Ubuntu and Postgres

    Links for the day



  20. It's Almost 2019 and Team UPC is Still Pretending Unitary Patent (UPC) Exists, Merely Waiting for Britain to Join

    Refusing to accept that the Unified Patent Court Agreement (UPCA) has reached its death or is at a dead end, UPC proponents — i.e. lawyers looking to profit from frivolous litigation — resort to outright lies and gymnastics in logic/intellectual gymnastics



  21. IAM and IP Kat Are Still Megaphones of Battistelli and His Agenda

    IAM reaffirms its commitment to corrupt Battistelli and IP Kat maintains its stance, which is basically not caring at all about EPO corruption (to the point of actively deleting blog comments that mention such corruption, i.e. 'sanitising' facts)



  22. The EPO Under António Campinos Relaxes the Rules on Software Patenting and the Litigation 'Industry' Loves That

    EPO management, which is nontechnical, found new terms by which to refer to software patents -- terms that even the marketing departments can endorse (having propped them up); they just call it all AI, augmented intelligence and so on



  23. Links 17/10/2018: Elementary OS 5.0 “Juno” Released, MongoDB’s Server Side Public Licence

    Links for the day



  24. Improving US Patent Quality Through Reassessments of Patents and Courts' Transparency

    Transparency in US courts and more public participation in the patent process (examination, litigation etc.) would help demonstrate that many patents are being granted — and sometimes asserted — that are totally bunk, bogus, fake



  25. Ask OIN How It Intends to Deal With Microsoft Proxies Such as Patent Trolls

    OIN continues to miss the key point (or intentionally avoid speaking about it); Microsoft is still selling 'protection' from the very same patent trolls that it is funding, arming, and sometimes even instructing (who to pass patents to and sue)



  26. Links 1610/2018: Linux 4.19 RC8, Xfce Screensaver 0.1.0 Released

    Links for the day



  27. Judge-Bashing Tactics, Undermining PTAB, and Iancu's Warpath for the Litigation and Insurance 'Industries'

    Many inter partes reviews (IPRs) at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) leverage 35 U.S.C. § 101 against software patents; instead of putting an end to such patents Director Iancu decides to just serve the 'industry' he came from (a meta-industry where his firm had worked for Donald Trump)



  28. 'Cloud', 'AI' and Other Buzzwords as Excuses for Granting Fake Patents on Software

    With resurgence of rather meaningless terms like so-called 'clouds' (servers/hosting) and 'AI' (typically anything in code which does something clever, including management of patents) the debate is being shifted away from 35 U.S.C. § 101 (Section 101); but courts would still see past such façade



  29. Corporate Media's Failure to Cover Patents Properly and Our New Hosting Woes

    A status update about EPO affairs and our Web host's plan to shut down (as a whole) very soon, leaving us orphaned or having to pay heavy bills



  30. Links 15/10/2018: Testing Ubuntu 18.10 Release Candidates, KaOS 2018.10 Released

    Links for the day


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