It is curious to find what goes through the minds of people who strive to actually own knowledge (or logic, or mathematics) such as algorithms and business methods. Mind the use of the word “own”, as opposed to “master”. Watch the video.
WIPO still operates at its own peril [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7] and its Big Corporate-minded biases endanger science and technology. It’s about time everyone realised this and demanded change. Just watch this patent trolls galore from November 2007 alone.
Back to comparing the top 7 districts for patent infringement. We’ll start with the numbers from November.
How about LG’s Troll Army, which has become something to rave about? When patent harassment becomes “cool”, then it ought to be clear that a system claiming to spur innovation has gone too far. █
There has been a wide range of discussion on the subject of Mono and its inclusion in Ubuntu by default. Some people believe that Mono may infringe on Microsoft patents while others believe that it is useful to include. Personally, I have no idea about whether Mono does infringe on Microsoft patents, but I see other reasons why Ubuntu should remove it.
Mono by default takes 48MB of space on the CD. The ISO download is 690+ MB. Therefore, it is taking up valuable space that could be used for a whole host of other things.
Rejecting Mono is not a case of zeal, but a case of defending the freedom of our desktop, among other things. █
As you may or may not remember, Microsoft has quietly ensured that its own employees go to the Ballot Resolution Meeting (BRM) to represent entire nations. This is of course preposterous because you virtually let a fox watch the henhouse, or let someone decide on his/her own wage. It’s just another examples of what Jeremy Allison called “Einstein’s definition of insanity”. And yet, the world goes on obediently and blindly (a peripheral picture of three monkeys[PNG] might be a good fit here).
”Remember ‘votes for hire’ in Italy, to name just one example?“Groklaw has just collected some more details. It’s looking ugly. It’s almost as though the BRM was nicely set up for Microsoft to come and collect a trophy. Since Microsoft is likely to attend ‘on behalf of’ entire nations and industries, this is another example (among many we’ve covered in the past) where the deck of cards contains just aces. Remember 'votes for hire' in Italy, to name just one example? Anyway, here are some of the latest information.
So if you had concerns about Microsoft’s patent policy, forgeddaboudit.
It’s been magically erased, and any comments are out of order.
They have chosen a room that can seat only 120 people for reasons unknown, so there may not be room for all the delegates. Let me guess. The head of the delegation is a Microsoft guy, and the ones who can’t fit in the room are the ones who have issues with the proposed format? You think? Hey, some of us remember the games that were played already over rooms too small for IBM and Sun.
This is the story PJ is referring to. Look who else is listed?
This is starting to look really, really bad. At a minimum, you have to say this is the very opposite of an open process. I can’t help but notice too that Brown lists Rick Jelliffe’s as one of the “cool blogs” he recommends on Brown’s blog. I think that is what novelists would call foreshadowing.
For those who do not know, Microsoft flies Rick Jelliffe around the world and also paid him to edit Wikipedia. With ‘independent’ professionals like these, who needs moderators? █
It was only days ago that ISO itself was willing to admit failures with Microsoft. Some said that ISO must no longer be seen as a high-status path for certification as a result of that. It’s sad, but this may be true.
As explained just moments ago, Microsoft will try very hard to have its proprietary format seen as “open”. Even if Microsoft’s assimilation grants it an ISO (which would be catastrophic not only to ISO, but to consumer as well), both the ISO and Microsoft should be worried, for trust has been betrayed and a crucial system been provably broken. The press in New Zealand has recognised this also.
3. ISO Loss of Credibility
Related to the previous point. ISO is the organisation that sets international standards on everything from chemicals in clothing to how your web browsers should work. Countries like New Zealand rely on many of these standards as we simply do not have the capacity to come up with our standards for everything. The credibility of ISO is therefore of huge importance to us.
In an attempt to railroad the world into continued use of their products, Microsoft has ridden roughshod over ISO’s processes and protocols. They have abused a process of standardisation that assumes good intent on all parties. This abuse is well documented and should be of major concern.
The article “Stuffing it Up” talks about these issues in gentle way and serves as a good primer.
Industry Motive: To preserve a monopoly and the fight to protect a four-billion-dollar per year cash cow against those who stand for open standards, against those who want to create even playing fields, fair competition, innovation and open access for everyone to benefit.
It’s sad to find that the ISO is caught in the middle of a vicious battle between the consumer and a single wealthy company that never knew ethics and will never behave like a gentleman. █
This article is partly a translation from this article: Microsoft is ook voor open standaarden
This week the Dutch government will discuss a proposal to switch as much as possible to open standards and open source software.
My comments: Contrary to what “buying rules”?
Open standards are ok for Microsoft, as long as these are their standars.
Why is it dangerous to focus too much on open source? Since it will affect Microsoft’s market share and profits?
This aligns with everything we’ve said about Microsoft invading the OSI, changing the agenda in Linux companies, and making lots of other moves, some of which make it appear like an open source player. This creates plenty of confusion. Free software is misunderstood along with its added value and philosophy. Policies that encourage competition are no longer compatible with the new state of the marketplace, which Microsoft manipulates to permanently alter. █