08.22.08

Non-compete, By Association

Posted in Microsoft, GNU/Linux, Novell, FOSS, OSI at 9:19 am by Roy Schestowitz

Novell suppresses skepticism and criticism of Microsoft inside the Free software world

We touched on this subject before in relation to the Linux Foundation. The short story is that Novell and Microsoft are partners and since Novell is behind the Linux Foundation, the Linux Foundation must at least pretend that it’s a friend of Microsoft — the very same company which thinks of Linux as a “cancer” and number-one competitor. In a sense, Novell and Microsoft ceased to compete. Novell is promoting Windows Vista [1, 2] and its on-line shop requires that visitors use Microsoft Internet Explorer.

For face value, Novell must insist that it still competes with Microsoft (see the article below). But… we’re not seeing it. Novell is always thankful to Microsoft for screwing companies like Mandriva and Red Hat. Microsoft, on the other hand, continues to loathe GNU/Linux as it attempts to replace that layer of the stack and probably attacks it, usually by proxy.

Novell, Re: Microsoft: ‘We Still Compete’

[…]

There’s also little question in my mind that Microsoft will not stop seeing Linux as a competitor, either.

Critics have already pointed out that the duality in Novell/Microsoft is stronger than the rivalry. For others who participate in development of Free software, this leads to a conflict of interest and a dilemma. Just watch what Aaron Seigo wrote yesterday. Because of Novell, the Linux Foundation too must be nice to Microsoft. Interviews with Jim Zemlin (past and present) reflect on that. Here is a new example

Linux Foundation member Novell (NASDAQ: NOVL) is pleased with the way things are going as well and in the leadership that Zemlin provides.

“We’re very satisfied with the Linux Foundation,” Justin Steinman, director of product marketing for Novell’s open-platform group, told InternetNews.com. “They serve a great purpose in bringing together the community, commercial Linux companies and end users, and they represent the interests of each group very well. We have a very close relationship with Jim, and we’re very pleased with the direction he’s taken the Linux Foundation.”

The relationship between Novell and the Linux Foundation is a fascinating yet rather disturbing thing [1, 2, 3]. IBM’s and Intel’s involvement there can’t be of much help, either.

At the end of the day, all these “non-compete”/’frienemies’ agreements are hurtful. They hurt he customer. [via Andy Updegrove of the Linux Foundation]

Non-compete clauses may have been the deciding factor in the Route 128 technology sector falling behind Silicon Valley in the 1970s and 1980s, according to a study performed at the University of Toronto.

The Rotman School of Management study found that laws enforcing non-compete clauses initially gave the Route 128-area companies the protection they needed to create new inventions in a young tech industry. As the industry grew, the non-compete clauses stifled growth by limiting labor mobility, according to the study.

Yesterday, the OSI’s chief, Michael Tiemann, came to realise that Novell and Microsoft are building a shared monopoly. It’s not good for anyone. So what are they going to do about it? █

Permalink Leave Your Comment      Send this to a friend      View as PDF

08.21.08

Novell Resentment: OSI, Others Begin to Wake Up

Posted in Microsoft, GNU/Linux, Novell, SLES/SLED, Deception, Marketing, OSI at 9:03 pm by Roy Schestowitz

Novell and Microsoft are allies, not rivals

After this revealing post, one must wonder if SJVN was contacted by Novell in order to soften him. Once again, he offers almost no criticism and instead he echoes Novell’s PR.

While many Linux users hated the idea of the Microsoft/Novell partnership from the start, Ian Bruce, director of Novell public relations, says that “Customers drove” the latest expansion of the Novell/Microsoft deal.

Right. So the previous PR Director quits, a new one joins, and being a PR director (for Novell and Microsoft), he is hyping things up. How ‘trustworthy’. Here is a response to him from Linux Today:

And since those “customers” that he speaks of would be Linux users …

While many Linux users hated the idea of the Microsoft/Novell partnership from the start, Ian Bruce, director of Novell public relations, says that Linux users “drove” the latest expansion of the Novell/Microsoft deal.

They hate it but they want more of it?

SJVN also includes this carefully-crated statement from Ron Hovsepian:

In a statement, Ron Hovsepian, Novell’s CEO, said “The strategic partnership between our companies continues to attract customers by building a bridge between proprietary and open source software. The interoperability delivered by Microsoft and Novell has resulted in very high demand for SUSE Linux Enterprise from customers and channel partners, further validating Novell’s Linux strategy.

Ryan Paul offers very little new information of significance. He does, however, pause at the sight of “intellectual property peace of mind.” That is the same phrase which pissed Aaron Seigo off, and rightly so!

Microsoft still repeatedly touts “intellectual property peace of mind” as one of the strengths of the agreement, but the rhetoric seems to have had no impact on the market. Microsoft still hasn’t revealed the alleged infringers or indicated which patents it believes are being infringed. The claims remain entirely hollow and no basis for the allegations has been presented.

The phrase “peace of mind”, which almost begs for an image of guns and kneecaps, has already been very prominent in the relevant Novell/Microsoft Web site/s touting the deal and also in the latest press release:

Microsoft Corp. and Novell Inc. are announcing an incremental investment in their relationship to meet accelerating customer demand for their business model solution, which is designed to build a bridge between open source and proprietary software to deliver interoperability and intellectual property (IP) peace of mind for organizations operating mixed-source IT environments.

ComputerWorld mentions us here and fortunately we received the attention of the OSI too. Michael asks in an apprehensive ‘open question’ fashion whether “Microsoft + Novell = Monopoly 2.0?”

But is Microsoft really so stupid that they would write a $100M check to prop up a message that nobody believes? I don’t believe so, and I especially don’t believe so given that nobody in the world of open source is asking Microsoft to keep propping up Novell. My conclusion, especially given the lack of response from Sam Ramji, is that Microsoft knows perfectly well what it is doing. Microsoft’s good-faith effort at technology innovation, Vista, has failed, and so they are resorting to their true core competency, updated to the 21st century: Monopoly 2.0.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Asay may be right that Microsoft is throwing away their money, in which case customers and shareholders may wish to be less generous sharing their money with Microsoft. Or Microsoft may be pursuing a new way to undermine open source–is that something you want to support?

We recently wrote about Microsoft’s threat to the OSI. They want to be inside. They’re everywhere already. There is hardly an open source conference that hasn’t been intruded by Microsoft through sponsorships. Absence has become rare. Even SourceForge gave up and ’sold out’. OSCON [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9] and OSBC [1, 2, 3, 4, 5] are among the larger-scale examples, but there have been many more.

There are some new exceptions. Here is one that does not (yet) list Microsoft among the sponsors.

With over three dozen sessions, workshops, and keynotes, OSSPAC 09 will be the premiere Open Source event held in Southeast Asia. Your participation is critical…

It is also unnatural to expect Microsoft to sponsor an OpenOffice.org conference.

The OpenOffice.org Conference 2008 will extend over three days, Wednesday 5th November to Friday 7th November inclusive. The Conference will open on 9am on Wednesday, and close on Friday 5.00pm.

In this particular context, if there is one common denominator for Novell and Microsoft, it is that both are throwing money at events and projects in order to suppress criticism. █

Permalink Leave Your Comment      Send this to a friend      View as PDF

08.15.08

Assorted Updates: Patents, OSI, Mono, KDE and Novell

Posted in Microsoft, Novell, SLES/SLED, Mono, KDE, Patents, Asia, FOSS, OSI at 8:54 am by Roy Schestowitz

From the Campaign for Document Freedom

Gentle Protest Against Software Patents in India

The situation in India has been covered quite a few times recently because it’s getting grim [1, 2, 3, 4]. Fortunately, now comes the organised opposition.

Bengaluru Meetup

When: 10am, Saturday 16th August 2008

Where: BMS College of Engineering, Basavanagudi

Agenda: Indian Patents office has called for a meeting of stakeholders in Bengaluru on 27th August (date still to be confirmed). We should submit a written appeal to stop introducing software patents in India. We will prepare this document here.

Software patents are, as stressed here before, merely a mechanism to have multi-nationals (and their local business partners) inherits the country’s assets. These patents are being marketed differently, however, in order for them to pass as a new amendment to the law.

Groklaw: “Enemies of FOSS Are Attacking”

Pamela Jones pointed this out yesterday. We are well past the “then they laugh at you” phase, so it’s only reasonable to prepare for more of the “then they attack you” outbursts. The OSI is explicitly mentioned by Pamela and Bruce Perens warns that Microsoft can have it ruined. The context is slightly different though.

It means that while OSI’s handling of a list of approved licenses worked very well for a community made up of FOSS programmers, who are decent folks all on the same page overall, now that enemies of FOSS are attacking, we need a new organization to vet licenses going forward a lot more carefully, one made up of experienced FOSS lawyers, none of them with a history of hostility to, or ignorance of, the GPL, with the community as advisors.

KDE

We are still watching KDE and Mono closely, hoping not to find irreversible intersection between these two. Some people have already noticed the growing trend inside GNOME.

As I briefly mentioned in another post, I am seriously concerned with GNOME’s infatuation with Microsoft technologies.

As a newcomer to the Linux scene, I was not aware that GNOME was tied up with Novell and all in a 3-way with Redmond. However, the more I find out about, the more discomforted I become…

And then there’s this comment.

Keep KDE Kleen

KDE needs to poll their own users before allowing proprietary sewage like C# and Mono to infect our relatively clean desktop.

I think most will be strongly opposed.

I will certainly be looking for a new desktop, for the first time since becoming involved with Free Software.

Just as a quick recap, consider Novell’s role.

SUSE is a good tool for Microsoft. It enables Microsoft to clog up some gaps where Windows would never fit. SUSE enables the monopolist to replace GNU/Linuxes with something that it ‘owns’ (in the mythical/’intellectual’ sense) and it’s therefore paid for (’compensated’). Using hypervisor/format/’protection’ caveats, Microsoft hopes to elevate its own asset (SUSE) at the expense of Ubuntus and Red Hats that roam freely, without per-copy restriction and Microsoft’s wrath.

Novell needs to be stopped. SLED/S/RT needs to be stopped. At the moment, if a company insists on using GNU/Linux, Microsoft can give them GNU/Linux, but not the GNU/Linux they want and need. Mono could part of the plan to transform ownership, passing more of it to Microsoft. █

Permalink 2 Comments      Send this to a friend      View as PDF

08.07.08

Microsoft’s Aggressive Push to Assimilate FOSS to Microsoft

Posted in Microsoft, Finance, GNU/Linux, Bill Gates, FOSS, ISO, OSI at 5:35 pm by Roy Schestowitz

First, some quotes:

“Open source is an intellectual-property destroyer […] I can’t imagine
something that could be worse than this for the software business and the
intellectual-property business. I’m an American; I believe in the American
way, I worry if the government encourages open source, and I don’t think we’ve
done enough education of policymakers to understand the threat.”

–Jim Allchin, Microsoft

“There’s no company called Linux, there’s barely a Linux road map. Yet Linux
sort of springs organically from the earth. And it had, you know, the
characteristics of communism that people love so very, very much about it.
That is, it’s free.”

–Steve Ballmer

“Thanks to Mr. Gates, we now know that an open Internet with protocols anyone
can implement is communism; it was set up by that famous communist agent, the
US Department of Defense.”

–Richard Stallman

Earlier on today, we wrote about OSCON and OSBC. Their role is increasingly becoming a commercial one, not a community or a dominantly-functional one. Microsoft now participates in merely any such event.

Regarding the previous post, said one reader: “It was well timed since now Microsoft has started targeting conferences.

“Also the shills seem to be pushing several related talking points / myths. e.g. the myth that Microsoft is all goodness and talent ruined by a few bad apples, or that Microsoft staff is all goodness and talent, held back by the executives. [But] only the lazy, stupid and greedy go into employment at Microsoft and the toxic work culture there harms any subsequent place they spread to afterwards.”

There is an element of truth to that, but it may seem a little blunt to some.

Bruce Perens loses some faith in LinuxWorld, too. It’s very commercialised, it’s managed and powered by a Windows/Microsoft Web site (which used to carry blatantly anti-Linux ads at one point) and Linus Torvalds appears to have not attended for years. The problem seems broader though, which may explain why so many organisers currently sell out to Microsoft. As Perens put it:

Trade shows worldwide are doing poorly. The web has taken over their function, to a great extent. Fuel prices and economic downturn aren’t helping either. And Open Source is so mainstream now that a show concerning Linux is redundant with other IT shows. Of late it’s seemed more like a virtualization and data-center show than a Linux show.

Community folks on the show floor are asking: Why do we need IDG, the operator of this moribund show? Rather than focus on the business of Open Source, why not focus on the Open Source projects, and other forms of collaboration like Wikipedia, Creative commons, etc? It’s time for a community show to replace the commercial ones.

Web sites may be replacing booths while blogs replace press releases and newspaper, to an extent.

Now it’s time to approach the main concern though. A rather spineless OSI caught the attention of Free Software Daily.

The OSI is willing to extend the olive branch to the likes of Microsoft, granting the benefit of the doubt, even while there is no doubt that Microsoft is actively attacking software freedom.

Likewise, Microsoft is willing to engage the OSI as well because they know the OSI is more receptive to Microsoft than the Free Software Foundation.

The other odd thing was how the woman who gave the introduction volunteered information about a new OSI board member from Africa.

She said the new board member was still feeling bruised after participating in OOXML process. So, what does it take to gain a seat on the OSI board? I’m not sure, but apparently, advocacy for OOXML doesn’t hurt your chances much.

The coverage first appeared in Linux.com, which people must remember is now indirectly funded by Microsoft. Very recently, a post from Michael of the OSI was about Microsoft. It could raise a brow.

“Remember that Microsoft also sponsors and visits Linux conferences these days, not just open source ones.”Perens warned about this. The open source definition is often attributed to him, so he matters.

Remember that Microsoft also sponsors and visits Linux conferences these days, not just open source ones. Recently, Perens published an analysis that echoes criticism of this, in relation to Apache.

It’s worth repeating what we wrote this morning about Microsoft playing “good cop, bad cop”. Gates is arguably gone (he still lobbies behind the scenes), but the same aggressive tactics remain. One reader E-mailed us his thought about this: “[Gates] seems as active as ever. He’s just trying distance himself from the group’s all-around lousy reputation while still letting it work for his agenda.”

Time Magazine very recently put up some Gates glorification articles. 3 of them! Only at the bottom of the pages, a conflict of interests was clearly stated. This was somewhat of a placement, plated there by the husband of the former head of the Gates Foundation. It was another fine example of self glorification and ‘public opinion manufacturing’.

last but not least, watch this new article about Microsoft creating a so-called “open-source lab”.

Microsoft is now preaching interoperability, announcing it will open its first open-source lab in Asia Pacific in the country.

[…]

An upcoming update to Microsoft Office, for example, will enable support for the Open Document Format (ODF), which rivals Microsoft’s Open Office XML.

Abet Dela Cruz, Microsoft Philippines platform strategy manager, said Microsoft now recognizes open source as a “first class” citizen, alluding to the movement’s growth and adoption.

To support this claim, he noted SourceForge, an online repository of applications built by the open source community. Out of 147,000 projects, he said 77,000 of these applications run on the Windows platform, which far outnumbers those built for Windows alone.

Microsoft? Open Source?!?! Well, that last quoted sentence reveals their intent/motive, which is of course to steal FOSS from GNU/Linux and other Free platforms, making these projects an exclusive part of Microsoft’s revenue streams.

To sum up, it’s important to ensure that GNU/Linux is not neglected because of Microsoft’s gifts. It’s also important to ensure that Microsoft does not police open-source by invading the OSI just like it took over ISO and like it tries to infiltrate OSA relentlessly. SCO too was getting cozy with the Linux community prior to those lawsuits. It wanted to show what a good citizen it was. █

Permalink Leave Your Comment      Send this to a friend      View as PDF

06.16.08

The Open Source ‘Census’ Lost Its Credibility

Posted in Microsoft, Windows, GNU/Linux, FUD, FOSS, OSI at 11:27 pm by Roy Schestowitz

“We believe every Linux customer basically has an undisclosed balance-sheet liability.”

–Steve Ballmer

Yesterday we wrote about the Open Source Census accepting Microsoft’s money. We criticised this move for being short-sighted yet typical.

You don’t really have to take our own word for it. Just take a look at the Web. Here are some early reactions:

From the CEO of MuleSource;

My guess? I think Microsoft wants access to the results both so it can understand open source but also so it can start to consider legal actions against the most popular products and the companies that develop them.

I’ll apologize in advance if the motives are completely altruistic but if the past is any evidence, we should really avoid giving this kind of information to Microsoft with no benefits attached to open source.

Pamela Jones wrote: “Um. They want to figure out who to sue over their stupid patents they allege are being infringed? You think? Learning from history and past Microsoft paid-for studies, I’d also predict that we will see a headline that Novell is winning in adoption rates, thus “proving” that it was right to sell out and sign a patent deal with Microsoft. A secondary finding could be that enterprise use of Linux otherwise is slowing, compared to a healthy Microsoft, I’ve no doubt. Thanks, Mary Jo, for letting us know Microsoft is funding this “study”, so we can ignore the results. I naturally hope no one joins the study, now that Microsoft is sponsoring it.”

Unsurprisingly, OStatic takes a gentler stance.

When we first told you about the Open Source Census back in April, there were already a number of sponsors, “with more expected to sign on in the future.” Well, today, another sponsor was announced and the name may surprise you — or maybe not. Microsoft. As expected, some open source supporters are in a twist over the news, while others are waxing philosophical.

ZDNet’s Mary-Jo Foley thinks that perhaps the move is motivated by Microsoft’s desire for greater interoperability with open source systems, and also to gain a “better understanding of where/how open-source software is gaining traction in enterprises in order to better fight it.”

There are also some interesting reactions in LinuxToday, such as this one.

This permits MS to find out the truth and to suppress any “bad news”. MS will also be able to “talk to” people that are getting started with FOSS.

All we will hear is how Linux/FOSS is struggling and just not getting deployed to any real extent.

Michael Tiemann (of OSI) says:

I do not see how it is valid to call this a census, unless there is a means to compel every single member of the open source community to surrender their information for the sponsors and executors the census. Is Microsoft promising to provide such muscle for OpenLogic? Or is Microsoft unclear on what the term “census” actually means. (I have my own opinions on whether they understand what “open source” means, at least when they use the term publicly.) Either way I don’t see this producing a valid result, just more confusion.

This concurs with the opinion of Pamela Jones over at Groklaw. Only days ago we wrote about Forrester’s acceptance of Microsoft money for anti-Linux ’studies’.

Last among these reactions is one from Matt Asay.

I think Microsoft just wants to be associated with any good-hearted open-source effort, so that it can appear…good hearted, without actually engaging open source in any deep, meaningful way.

Glyn Moody’s assessment, which we cited yesterday, is very similar to this.

To summarise, here is what Microsoft can gain:

1. Knowledge of who uses which Free software products, potentially for extortion purposes (or ‘tax’)
2. Ability to game — to a greater or lesser extent — statistics about open source use
3. Production of FUD studies, which lead to misleading and misinformed press coverage
4. Dilution of the “Open Source” value and definition
5. Further confusion and ruining of the reputation of a census
6. Claims of goodwill and belonging to the open source ‘movement’ (subversive and self-serving assimilation [1, 2, 3, 4])
7. Ability to accuse companies of being intolerant towards Microsoft’s participation (daemonisation using the “Microsoft hater” label [1, 2])

Surely enough, we’ll be seeing Microsoft intrude more such initiatives and infiltrate events under the ‘interoperability’ guise. It does not usually work out so well at the end. In fact, the CEO of SourceForge recently quit his job, but to be fair, there’s no evidence that associates any of this with the FUD Awards controversy. █

Permalink 2 Comments      Send this to a friend      View as PDF

06.13.08

If Microsoft’s Marketing Ploy Continues, “Open Source” is Passé

Posted in Microsoft, Deception, Europe, Asia, Open XML, FOSS, ISO, OSI at 11:23 am by Roy Schestowitz

“Open Source” is no longer synonymous with Free software. Far from it.

This item explores some of the latest evidence which suggests Microsoft is hijacking and subverting “Open Source” as it was once known to people. This development was seen in advance… a very long time ago as a matter of fact.

Backstabbing of Developers, Possibly Bald-faced Lies

The Sandcastle open source hoax was mentioned here before, so its description probably needn’t be repeated. It is, however, important to emphasise a few things:

1. Rather than tilting Sandcastle into an ‘open source’ route when it got caught with its pants down, Microsoft withdrew it. That’s the equivalent of promising you diamond, but giving you sandy and shady glass instead; once busted, they grab the glass away rather than fulfill the promise. That’s very, very low. It’s a shame that A- and B-class bloggers were too shy to vent; they were almost as apologetic as Microsoft.
2. Herein we ought to find some more early warning signs. We find dishonesty. Microsoft itself is faking open source and probably then pretending that it was just a ‘terrible mistake’ (as opposed to a marketing ploy gone awry).
3. The third thing, which was probably easy to miss, is that developers clearly got betrayed by Microsoft’s selfish deeds (and yes, it’s a pattern, almost a cliché by now). Here. Have a look below.

The fix to Microsoft’s open source faux pas creates another problem: Developers were relying on Sandcastle to produce code documentation. Numerous responses to Ramji’s blog post indicate real frustration over having the documentation tool summarily yanked out from under their projects.

Adding insult to injury, the OSI seems to have said nothing about this. Microsoft got away with faking. How irresponsible.

Microsoft’s ‘Open Source’: Windows-only “Collaborative Development”

Watch what Glyn Moody has just had to say. We covered these issues recently.

This trope of openness being “just another business model” is a favourite of Microsoft’s, alongside “we need more than one standard for a given area, to promote choice” - when what are needed are *implementations* of a single standard. These rhetorical siblings are rather desperate, if amusingly Jesuitical, attempts to use words to gloss over the reality.

Going a little further (perhaps too far), remember what Microsoft wishes to strip off the definition it’s unable to embrace.

Microsoft is going to become an OSS company, not a FOSS company. (See what the “F” stands for here.) We are already seeing the early signs of this. They have created a couple of open source licenses and have submitted them for approval successfully with the Open Source Initiative. Microsoft has pledged to become a more open company. Although the said pledge has been received with a lot of skepticism, I think they really mean it. They have to. Microsoft is now hard at work trying to convince the world that they really have changed. Is all this going to be enough? I don’t think so.

Blasts from the Past Year

New readers may not have seen the following old stories that speak volume. We wish to repeat them in sequence.

Steve Ballmer: ‘I would love to see all open source innovation happen on top of Windows’

Steve Ballmer apparently likes open source. Well, so long as it drives Windows revenue. And doesn’t replace any. Ever. In fact, as he said at an event in Microsoft last week in London that he hopes to see all open-source innovation going to Windows, rather than Linux (more below).

Ballmer: Microsoft Will Buy Open-Source Companies

“We will do some buying of companies that are built around open-source products,” Ballmer said during an onstage interview at the Web 2.0 Summit in San Francisco.

Steve Ballmer on Open Source, Online and Other

Any plans to bring development tools to other platforms? No.

OSI approves Microsoft licenses

For now though it’s all eyes on Microsoft to see what the company will do next, and in many ways this will be more interesting than whether or not the OSI approved the licenses. For reasons that were never fully explained, Microsoft wanted open source licenses.

Now that it’s got them, will it use them to release significant code to the community?

BECTA Revisited

Earlier on we wrote about what we can only suspect is rotten; it might end up as another BECTA scam. Here you can find some valuable background information from ITPro, which is UK-based.

Becta, open source and education: Too little, too late?

[…]

Slow adoption of open source and free software in UK schools can be attributed to the same kind of inertia that afflicts SMEs in the UK. It arises from a fear of the unknown, misapprehensions of the capabilities of the software, over-reliance on trusted suppliers, and general lack of awareness of the alternatives - but the major obstacle has been a lack of coordination, direction or understanding from the relevant authorities, exacerbated by a series of agreements with Microsoft at government level that have effectively tied the education system into Microsoft-only solutions.

Recall yet again which firm BECTA finally chose and who got designated for “Open Source”. BECTA chose a Windows/Microsoft shop for so-called ‘open source’, whose site won’t work without Flash. What a farce in the making. Later on they might use such a farce to throw ‘blame’ and pull a Newham [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7].

BECTA seems to have deceived on “Open Source”. Many in the UK will be deeply disappointed by the choice of a proprietary software workshop (consultancy). How can it be trusted in handling what should be open source software at schools? More absurd than this it hardly ever gets and flack for it is only to be expected in days to come.

Time to paddle back to “Free Software”? Gradually maybe? Need there be an index?

The Great OOXML Scam

“Remember: it’s all just for marketing purposes.”For OOXML marketing needs, Microsoft India is still hijacking (or borrowing) “open source” and pretending to have embraced it (its own definition of it). Remember: it’s all just for marketing purposes. This article seems like another Microsoft brainwash piece, but you may wish to familiarise yourself with the mental manipulation contained in it.

Moving a little further, it’s clear that secret formats remain secret formats. Formed selfishly, put together privately (out of people’s sight) and made dependent on a single platform and non-Free application, here is where we stand. There is still no OOXML. Nobody know what it is, yet Microsoft boasts about a mythical rubber stamp it acquired from ISO.

The standard as it stands is naked. It lacks a text. Where is it? The secret 30 April document is a phantom. We don’t know yet if ISO can provide a consolidated version of the BRM results. We only know that member states adopted the non-existing text as a standard. Now the nations that filed complaints will be blamed for lack of delivery.

This one is good for a laugh as well. The level of deception has no bounds.

█

“You know what Microsoft’s problem really is? They’ve lost the ability to feel ashamed.”

–PJ, Groklaw

Permalink 2 Comments      Send this to a friend      View as PDF

04.18.08

More Legal Trouble for a Microsoft Patent Partner (Fraud); Google Stumbles

Posted in FSF, Microsoft, GNU/Linux, GPL, Google, Fraud, Samsung, OSI at 6:57 pm by Roy Schestowitz

One of Microsoft’s lesser-known partners, which also signed a software patent deal involving Linux, is Samsung. We wrote about Samsung’s corruption allegations just a fortnight ago and also provided many contextual links for background about this deal.

The New York Times has more information at the moment. It is suggesting that the chairman of the company is personally involved and also charged. This looks bad for this gigantic company as a whole.

The chairman of the Samsung Group, Lee Kun-hee, has been indicted on charges of evading taxes on billions of dollars that he hid in stock accounts under the names of his aides, a special prosecutor announced on Thursday.

The weaker and less credible Microsoft’s partners become, the better it is for freedom of software. The abuse of the GPL must end and the GPLv3 is one possible solution to these deals.

While on the subject of GPLv3, some readers are likely to recall the AGPL-Google kerkuffle [1, 2, 3] because it led to a few discussions in this Web site. As it turns out, Google’s AGPLv3 snub is no accident and there’s more to it.

Chris [DiBona]:

Actually, we think that creating individual pools of software that cannot be shared amongst other licenses is less open, which is why we are against license proliferation.

SoC isn’t much about recruiting, but more about creating more open source code and developers.

mtg [Milking The Gnu]:

So the argument is that of compatibility? (e.g. creating less ‘pools’) but then by the same token you could have only the X/MIT license …

It raises another issue though: does it mean Google doesn’t really trust the OSI?

What if OSI starts delivering say an “Open Choice Repository” label to those repositories offering all OSI-approved licenses; does Google code want to end-up next to Microsoft CodePlex which denies hosting to GPLv3 projects?

Bear in mind that Chris DiBona used to be a very active participant in the OSI. We corresponded on several occasions. In this blog post (correspondence), DiBona says that he likes beer and wine. Well, it’s time to sober up.

The AGPLv3 is a reality and it’s extremely important to defend it. If Google disregards even the OSI’s approval (never mind the FSF’s principles), then Google will further complicate status issues amongst some developers. Time to face reality, Google. Your shareholders need the faith of the geeks. █

Permalink Leave Your Comment      Send this to a friend      View as PDF

04.12.08

The Linux Foundation, OSI and the Neglected Values of Freedom

Posted in FSF, Microsoft, Novell, GPL, FOSS, BSD, OSI at 10:17 am by Roy Schestowitz

Difference of opinion is no excuse for fighting though

The Novell-LF special relationship was demonstrated in the past in order to explain their attitudes. If following of the moneyflow is the path to better understanding of action, then caution will be required when the Foundation delivers a message on behalf of its f[o]unding members, collectively.

The business-oriented approach of the Linux Foundation was noted on several occasions before and it’s pretty well expressed in the following new article.

I came away from the second annual Linux Foundation Collaboration Summit with mixed feelings. I mean, it’s hard not to support the group that pays Linus Torvalds to spend his time continuing to lead the poster-boy project for free and open source software. But at the same time, those golden chains are my biggest concern about the Linux Foundation.

IBM sponsored the event, and they are the biggest supporter of Linux in the corporate world. The foundation membership is made up of almost all the large and and many of wanna-be-large IT firms around the globe — including Adobe, which is one of the foundation’s newest members.

“…Perens will be better off defending and promoting the GPLv3.”There are other similar issues that apply to the OSI. In order to prevent greater influence by Microsoft inside the OSI, Bruce Perens recently stepped up to be elected, yet it does not appear as though he was successful, despite the overwhelming support in his online petition. In any event, the OSI had already lost some credibility with dilution of key values, so Perens will be better off defending and promoting the GPLv3. In fact, the software that runs his news site, Technocrat, has just been released under the AGPLv3, which on a separate note Google continues to snub (whereas Palamida had it welcomed). Where is Chris DiBona and when will there be an open explanation for this?

There are other noteworthy frictions in the Free software world. Theo de Raadt goes on the offensive against Richard Stallman again, although he would be wiser to bury the hatchets and let all this hostility slide. We showed before, using Microsoft’s internal documents, how the company encourages civil wars, friction and hostility among allies which jointly become great threat to it. These are ugly, unethical and maybe even illegal measures to take.

Anyway, those wondering what Theo is up to at a moment will find information here.

The song for the upcoming 4.3 release is titled, “Home to Hypocrisy”, with scathing references to some recent postings on the OpenBSD -misc mailing list by Free Software Foundation creator Richard Stallman.

He now uses some humour against Richard Stallman, but it’s unnecessary and hardly amusing. Criticism is fine, but being polite and gentle is a virtue. █

“Real men don’t attack straw men”

–Richard Stallman, December 2007

Permalink 8 Comments      Send this to a friend      View as PDF