04.09.08
OOXML Fiasco: More Legal Action Against the BSI Possible
Reassuring news arrived from The Inquirer, which says that a legal challenge to the BSI might be served in addition to a formal complaint and a large-scale investigation by the European Commission. It could soon become the third vector of scrutiny.
the UK Unix and Open Systems User Group (UKUUG) has sought the advice of a barrister over whether it can mount a legal challenge to a British Standards Institute decision to approve the Microsoft standard. It has also written to the BSI asking for an explanation.
We last wrote about the BSI yesterday, including pointers to previous self-containing summaries. Despite the secrecy of the process (no transparency in an open standards process), the evidence gathered seems sufficient to justify a thorough investigation into what seems like ballot-stuffing.
If you are part of the action against the BSI and you require more information you are unable to find, please leave a comment. Justice ought to be eventually brought because large-scale interaction on the Web makes corruption more shallow. We accused the BSI back in February, long before we even knew about the outcome. █
“If you flee the rules, you will be caught. And it will cost you dearly.”
Highlight: Novell was the first to acknowledge that Microsoft FUD tactics had substance. Novell then used anti-Linux FUD to market itself. 
Highlight: Xandros let Microsoft make patent claims and brag about (paid-for) OOXML support. 
Highlight: Linspire's CEO not only fell into Microsoft arms, but he also assisted the company's attack on GNU/Linux. 
Highlight: Microsoft craves pseudo (proprietary) standards and gets its way using proxies and influence which it buys. 
Highlight: The invasion into the open source world is intended to leave Linux companies neglected, due to financial incentives from Microsoft. 
Analysis: Xen, an open source hypervisor, possibly fell victim to Microsoft's aggressive (and stealthy) acquisition-by-proxy strategy.