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

10.07.08

Threats Are Cheap

Posted in Intellectual Monopoly, ISO, Microsoft at 8:13 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

I want you for money

The usual crony/ies appear to be resorting to intimidation now that OOMXL texts are out there for all to view (and no, it’s not just in Boycott Novell as other Web sites got hold of the files around the same time it circulated, and published them too). The files could also reach Wikileaks, so what’s the difference? There’s none.

Let’s set the record straight: The OOXML saga has been corrupt from start to finish. Will anyone try to challenge the strong and extensive evidence? Good luck with all that. As a matter of fact, even the man on top of the process has already admitted that it had gone awry. To quote:

“This year WG1 have had another major development that has made it almost impossible to continue with our work within ISO. The influx of P members whose only interest is the fast-tracking of ECMA 376 as ISO 29500 has led to the failure of a number of key ballots. Though P members are required to vote, 50% of our current members, and some 66% of our new members, blatantly ignore this rule despite weekly email reminders and reminders on our website. As ISO require at least 50% of P members to vote before they start to count the votes we have had to reballot standards that should have been passed and completed their publication stages at Kyoto. This delay will mean that these standards will appear on the list of WG1 standards that have not been produced within the time limits set by ISO, despite our best efforts.

The disparity of rules for PAS, Fast-Track and ISO committee generated standards is fast making ISO a laughing stock in IT circles. The days of open standards development are fast disappearing. Instead we are getting “standardization by corporation”, something I have been fighting against for the 20 years I have served on ISO committees. I am glad to be retiring before the situation becomes impossible. I wish my colleagues every success for their future efforts, which I sincerely hope will not prove to be as wasted as I fear they could be.”

Martin Bryan, ISO ‘Escapee’
Formerly Convenor, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC34 WG1

Throughout this appalling process, some people lost their jobs. Many others were smeared by anonymous characters and even directly, i.e. by Microsoft employees. It is all well documented.

The text in question (OOXML) is appalling in terms of quality and yet it was kept secret and hidden away from the very same people whom it affects. This is transparency?

There are two issues of transparency here:

  1. Transparency of technical documentation. How can a standard ever be called “open” if not even the terms of Open Access (OA) are being met?
  2. Transparency of the process. ISO, caring for its broken reputation, will insist that the process was fine, yet to fails to provide any proof of it. As the BRM in Geneva taught everyone, it’s all just a back-door arrangement involving stuffed panels congregating behind closed doors to decide ‘on behalf’ of ‘the world’.

The ISO process was horrendous. Tim Bray, a world authority in the field of XML, called the process “brutal and corrupt”. It was so bad that it ended up going under a formal investigation by the European Commission.

These investigators must be so overwhelmed by evidence that they do not even know where to start and what to choose. And yet, despite all of this, Alex Brown, who essentially markets Microsoft OOXML (talk about conflict of an interests) [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21], had decided to threaten me with vague allegation of lawsuits.

And (I did hint we might come down from being high-minded) talking of copyright violation I notice some of the dafter quarters of the web have published the ISO/IEC 29500:2008 (OOXML) text. Now, while not many people know for sure what ITTF do to a text when they prepare it for publication, one thing they do do for sure is to put a copyright statement on every page. So what we have witnessed is a brazen act of copyright violation. The boobies have even been so good as to boast about the bandwidth requirements their crimes have occasioned (no further questions, m’lud).

Even now, I can hear those Geneva lawyers licking their lips over this one … ”

Given how ugly the process has been thus far, it hardly surprises that it continues to be ugly. People who were appalled by the corruption have already spilled some beans before (against the ‘precious’ yet ridiculous rules).

Threats are cheap and we've witnessed them before, Alex. They make ISO look even worse.

Watch the photo here. It’s hilarious.

So let’s call it tit-for-tat, Alex. ;-)

“Microsoft corrupted many members of ISO in order to win approval for its phony ‘open’ document format, OOXML. This was so governments that keep their documents in a Microsoft-only format can pretend that they are using ‘open standards.’ The government of South Africa has filed an appeal against the decision, citing the irregularities in the process.”

Richard Stallman, June 2008

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

22 Comments

  1. AlexH said,

    October 7, 2008 at 8:19 am

    Gravatar

    Ignoring whether or not these specs. should be in the public domain (not the copyright phrase), I wouldn’t blow off his suggestion so readily.

    They can’t come after you for obvious reasons, but if I were Shane – with the DMCA as it is – I wouldn’t be parading this around.

  2. Roy Schestowitz said,

    October 7, 2008 at 8:29 am

    Gravatar

    Taking it off the server is trivial, but that wouldn’t make the dirty secret (OOXML) disappear. It was never truly invisible and if ISO thinks that it can keep it ‘safe’ from spreading, it ought to learn a lesson or two from the MPAA/RIAA. You can’t battle the sharing — through conversation of the very least — of information. A lot of people already knew what was in OOXML. They cannot just ‘unknow’ it. See this good essay:

    http://slated.org/the_right_to_own_knowledge

  3. AlexH said,

    October 7, 2008 at 8:33 am

    Gravatar

    Look, I’m not arguing that the development of the spec. should be done in the open.

    I’m just saying that taking Brown’s comments as a threat is potentially missing an underlying good piece of advice. But, that’s up to you and Shane.

  4. Roy Schestowitz said,

    October 7, 2008 at 8:43 am

    Gravatar

    For 6+ billion people to understand how Microsoft is scheming to lock their personal data (for profit) only makes sense, especially given the ways Microsoft corrupted their countries in the process.

    Think of it as a moral obligation, but shall ISO go litigious, I’ll remove these files immediately, no complains made. ISO would then come under fire from other people (that’s my prediction), it will get not even a penny, and the document will never stop circulating anyway (by E-mail, torrent, P2P, or CD-ROM).

    To think that I’m the first one to have gotten my hands on this is false. To publish something without a breach is not so rude, especially given the moral factors at play (hint).

    If Microsoft/ISO wants a scapegoat, let them make their critics’ day.

  5. AlexH said,

    October 7, 2008 at 8:55 am

    Gravatar

    Sure, but it’s not worth getting into a legal tussle about it. I’m sure Rob Weir or someone else with access to the docs would be in a better position to take that heat…

    … or even wikileaks, as you mentioned previously.

  6. Roy Schestowitz said,

    October 7, 2008 at 9:01 am

    Gravatar

    Fine then. I’ll remove all the files.

  7. AlexH said,

    October 7, 2008 at 9:04 am

    Gravatar

    Look, if you’re going to begrudge it then put them back and deal with any (unlikely) legal flak.

    I’m just trying to suggest to you that there are easier ways of achieving the same thing.

  8. Roy Schestowitz said,

    October 7, 2008 at 9:09 am

    Gravatar

    I don’t need legal mud on my tail. Anyway, we’ve moved on. Posted just minutes ago:

    http://boycottnovell.com/2008/10/07/brazil-hijacked-by-microsoft/

  9. twitter said,

    October 7, 2008 at 10:27 am

    Gravatar

    AlexH, you are here to threaten and entrap. Both you and Brown have Zero Credibility.

  10. AlexH said,

    October 7, 2008 at 10:35 am

    Gravatar

    @twitter: that’s a false assertion, unsupportable, and you know it.

    If you want to encourage Roy to break laws, go ahead and do it. In this case though, I suggest that there are bigger players like IBM who will be more willing to take that fall.

  11. Alex Brown said,

    October 7, 2008 at 11:29 am

    Gravatar

    @AlexH

    > bigger players like IBM who will be
    > more willing to take that fall

    I think the day you find a big software vendor playing fast and loose with IP rights will be the day hell freezes over! Rob Weir has had a copy of the 29500 text since March, but is waaaay too wise to broadcast it over the web!

    - Alex.

  12. AlexH said,

    October 7, 2008 at 12:19 pm

    Gravatar

    @Alex: sure, but if they wanted to get their point across, they could. The ECMA standard has been out there for ages, so all they need to tell people is how it has changed post BRM. You can do that without copying bits verbatim.

    Though, I think at this point it’s a bit pointless since presumably they will be publishing it properly not too long from now. At least, hopefully….

  13. Needs Sunlight said,

    October 7, 2008 at 12:51 pm

    Gravatar

    The material is public. The scandal needs to be more visible. Posting the material will help show either the rotten-to-the-core specification as it is, or how desperate MSFTers are to sneak this one in under the radar.

    Maybe it is time that MS is banned from EU procurement. That would be about the only remedy (aside from necklacing Gates and crew on pay per view) that could have any near-term impact:

    http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2008/06/19/231119/green-meps-say-microsoft-should-be-banned-from-eu-procurement.htm

  14. Needs Sunlight said,

    October 7, 2008 at 12:52 pm

    Gravatar

    @AlexH: that’s some heavy FUD. What are you so eager to shelter MS for?

  15. AlexH said,

    October 7, 2008 at 12:56 pm

    Gravatar

    @Needs: sorry? What is FUD?

    I haven’t said that it shouldn’t be out in the open…

  16. Roy Schestowitz said,

    October 7, 2008 at 1:29 pm

    Gravatar

    …’Open’ standards that you have no access to. Now, that’s an oxymoron, don’t you think? Let people put their data in the ‘open’ cryptic format that will force them to buy the latest Microsoft Office. Over and over and over again. Well done, ISO, for sheltering business agenda of a monopolist.

  17. AlexH said,

    October 7, 2008 at 2:49 pm

    Gravatar

    @Roy: it’s not an ISO standard yet, so the question is moot. They didn’t openly publish the ODF changes either; we had to wait for 1.0 rev 2 from OASIS for that.

    And before you accuse me of your usual “similar evil” argument, re-read what I said until you understand it.

  18. AlexH said,

    October 7, 2008 at 2:50 pm

    Gravatar

    And no, I don’t agree it should be closed, either.

    It’s just nothing new, this is how ISO operates.

  19. Roy Schestowitz said,

    October 7, 2008 at 4:18 pm

    Gravatar

    Hey, check this one out. :-)

    http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-95230/sc34-thanked-microsoft-korea-for-the-dinner

    “The company from Redmond is heavily investing in the ISO SC34 committee. Thanks to a brazilian blogger who manage to shed some light on what was going on in there, we hear now that Microsoft Korea was paying for dinner.”

  20. AlexH said,

    October 7, 2008 at 4:32 pm

    Gravatar

    @Roy: why stop at dinners?

    Some large proportion of ISO’s funding (1/3rd or 2/3rd, I can’t remember which) comes from corporate sponsors.

    They pay for a lot more than the dinners.

  21. pcole said,

    October 7, 2008 at 4:57 pm

    Gravatar

    That seems to be the re-occurring problem; That corporations & monopolists monetarily remunerate organizations which are supposed to be beyond that (bribery, lobby-ism, etc.) and are to represent the consumer in being vendor agnostic.

  22. Roy Schestowitz said,

    October 7, 2008 at 4:56 pm

    Gravatar

    Microsoft attacked ODF very viciously. Why is it suddenly paying people who work on ODF?

    [quote]
    If you watch the arrangements made at the XML 2007 conference, you’ll
    find that Microsoft hosts, pays for, covers, and sponsors all sorts of
    things (mind the “Hors d’oeuvres and drinks hosted by Microsoft”).
    [/quote]

    http://boycottnovell.com/2007/12/06/moonlight-drinks-xml-2007/

    [quote]
    A reader has made us aware us a very curious mailing list thread.
    “Someone harshly criticized Microsoft security making some very good
    points,” he writes. “Suddenly a Microsoft rep materialized on the
    mailing list to refute them, offer to put on a security dog and pony
    show for the group and buy everyone lunch, and that’s where it ended!
    [/quote]

    http://boycottnovell.com/2007/12/09/microsoft-buying-love/

    [quote]
    The Vole [Microsoft] supposedly invited The INQ over for tea because we
    are notorious “Microsoft doubters” – and we were accompanied by other
    supposed Vole doubters such as the folk from lifehacker and a very nice
    man from Slashdot, as well as some Microsoft MvPs.
    [/quote]

    http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=36312

    [quote]
    Microsoft flew me there from Florida at its expense, put me up in a nice
    hotel, provided decent food, and comped me and four other invitees to
    this “special conference” with presentations about the marvels of Vista
    and other recent or upcoming Microsoft products. They didn’t quite play
    the old Beatles song “Love Me Do” in the background, but it was the
    event’s unstated theme.
    [/quote]

    http://www.linux.com/article.pl?sid=06/12/12/085222

    [quote]
    Gilad Tiefenbrun, Director of Engineering of Linn Products in Scotland
    (known since the 1970s for their high-end audio equipment), showed their
    new Sneaky Music DS device for playing high quality music stored on a
    home LAN — with Open Source software components you can modify to your
    heart’s content.

    Microsoft picked up the tab for drinks and food
    [/quote]

    http://danbricklin.com/log/2008_03_06.htm#tt03linn

    Also relevant:

    http://boycottnovell.com/2008/03/11/microsoft-invades-foss/
    http://boycottnovell.com/2008/04/02/foss-grab-and-redefinition/

What Else is New


  1. Berkheimer or No Berkheimer, Software Patents Remain Mostly Unenforceable in the United States and the Supreme Court is Fine With That

    35 U.S.C. § 101, which is based on cases like Alice and Mayo, offers the 'perfect storm' against software patents; it doesn't look like any of that will change any time soon (if ever)



  2. Ignoring and Bashing Courts: Is This the Future of Patent Offices in the West?

    Andrei Iancu, who is trying to water down 35 U.S.C. § 101 while Trump ‘waters down’ SCOTUS (which delivered Alice), isn’t alone; António Campinos, the new President of the EPO, is constantly promoting software patents (which European courts reject, citing the EPC) and even Australia’s litigation ‘industry’ is dissenting against Australian courts that stubbornly reject software patents



  3. Patent Maximalists Are Still Trying to Figure Out How to Stop PTAB or Prevent US Patent Quality From Ever Improving

    Improvements are being made to US patents because of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), which amends/culls/pro-actively rejects (at application phases) bad patents; but the likes of Andrei Iancu cannot stand that because they're patent maximalists, who personally gain from an over-saturation of patents



  4. Links 15/11/2018: Zentyal 6.0, Deepin 15.8, Thunderbird Project Hiring

    Links for the day



  5. A Question of Debt: António Campinos, Lexology, Law Gazette, and Sam Gyimah

    Ineptitude in the media which dominates if not monopolises UPC coverage means that laws detrimental to everyone but patent lawyers are nowadays being pushed even by ministers (not just those whose clandestine vote is used/bought to steal democracy overnight)



  6. Science Minister Sam Gyimah and the EPO Are Eager to Attack Science by Bringing Patent Trolls to Europe/European Union and the United Kingdom

    Team UPC has managed to indoctrinate or hijack key positions, causing those whose job is to promote science to actually promote patent trolls and litigation (suppressing science rather than advancing it)



  7. USF Revisits EPO Abuses, Highlighting an Urgent Need for Action

    “Staff Representation Disciplinary Cases” — a message circulated at the end of last week — reveals the persistence of union-busting agenda and injustice at the EPO



  8. Links 14/11/2018: KDevelop 5.3, Omarine 5.3, Canonical Not for Sale

    Links for the day



  9. Second Day of EPOPIC: Yet More Promotion of Software Patents in Europe in Defiance of Courts, EPC, Parliament and Common Sense

    Using bogus interpretations of the EPC — ones that courts have repeatedly rejected — the EPO continues to grant bogus/fake/bunk patents on abstract ideas, then justifies that practice (when the audience comes from the litigation ‘industry’)



  10. Allegations That António Campinos 'Bought' His Presidency and is Still Paying for it

    Rumours persist that after Battistelli had rigged the election in favour of his compatriot nefarious things related to that were still visible



  11. WIPO Corruption and Coverup Mirror EPO Tactics

    Suppression of staff representatives and whistleblowers carries on at WIPO and the EPO; people who speak out about abuses are themselves being treated like abusers



  12. Links 13/11/2018: HPC Domination (Top 500 All GNU/Linux) and OpenStack News

    Links for the day



  13. The USPTO and EPO Pretend to Care About Patent Quality by Mingling With the Terms “Patent” and “Quality”

    The whole "patent quality" propaganda from EPO and USPTO management continues unabated; they strive to maintain the fiction that quality rather than money is their prime motivator



  14. Yannis Skulikaris Promotes Software Patents at EPOPIC, Defending the Questionable Practice Under António Campinos

    The reckless advocacy for abstract patents on mere algorithms from a new and less familiar face; the EPO is definitely eager to grant software patents and it explains to stakeholders how to do it



  15. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is Working for Patent Trolls and Patent Maximalists

    The patent trolls' propagandists are joining forces and pushing for a patent system that is hostile to science, technology, and innovation in general (so as to enable a bunch of aggressive law firms to tax everybody)



  16. Team UPC, Fronting for Patent Trolls From the US, is Calling Facts “Resistance”

    The tactics of Team UPC have gotten so tastelessly bad and its motivation so shallow (extortion in Europe) that one begins to wonder why these people are willing to tarnish everything that's left of their reputation



  17. The Federal Circuit Bar Association (FCBA) Will Spread the Berkheimer Lie While Legal Certainty Associated With Patents Remains Low and Few Lawsuits Filed

    New figures regarding patent litigation in the United States (number of lawsuits) show a decrease by about a tenth in just one year; there's still no sign of software patents making any kind of return/rebound in the United States, contrary to lies told by the litigation 'industry' (those who profit from frivolous lawsuits/threats)



  18. Links 12/11/2018: Linux 4.20 RC2, Denuvo DRM Defeated Again

    Links for the day



  19. Automation of Searches Will Not Solve the Legitimacy Problem Caused by Patents Lust

    The false belief that better searches and so-called 'AI' can miraculously assess patents will simply drive/motivate bad decisions and already steers bad management towards patent maximalism (presumption of examination/validation where none actually exists)



  20. The Federal Circuit and PTAB Are Not Slowing Down; Patent Maximalists Claim It's 'Harassment' to Question a Patent's Validity

    There’s no sign of stopping when it comes to harassment of judges and courts; those who make a living from patent threats and litigation do anything conceivable to stop the ‘bloodbath’ of US patents which were never supposed to have been granted in the first place



  21. Patent Maximalists Will Latch Onto Return Mail v US Postal Service in an Effort to Weaken or Limit Post-Grant Reviews of US Patents

    An upcoming case, dealing with what governments can and cannot do with/to patents (specifically the US government and US patents), interests the litigation 'industry' because it loathes reviews of low-quality and/or controversial patents (these reviews discourage litigation or stop lawsuits early on in the cycle)



  22. Guest Post: EPO Spins Censorship of Staff Representation

    Another concrete example of Campinos' cynical story-telling



  23. Andrei Iancu and Laura Peter Are Two Proponents of Patent Trolls at the Top of the USPTO

    Patent offices do not seem to care about the law, about the courts, about judges and so on; all they care about is money (and litigation costs) and that’s a very major problem



  24. The Patent 'Industry' Wants Incitations and Feuds, Not Innovation and Collaboration

    The litigation giants and their drones keep insisting that they're interested in helping scientists; but sooner or later the real (productive) industry learns to kick them to the curb and work together instead of suing



  25. EPO 'Outsourcing' Rumours

    The EPO advertises jobs in Prague and Lisbon; this leads to speculations less than a year after António Campinos sent EU-IPO jobs to India (for cost reduction)



  26. Links 11/11/2018: Bison 3.2.1 and FreeBSD 12.0 Beta 4

    Links for the day



  27. Pro-Litigation Front Groups Like CIPA and Team UPC Control the EPO, Which Shamelessly Grants Software Patents

    With buzzwords and hype like "insurtech", "fintech", "blockchains" and "AI" the EPO (and to some degree the USPTO as well) looks to allow a very wide range of software patents; the sole goal is to grant millions of low-quality patents, creating unnecessary litigation in Europe



  28. Latest Loophole: To Get Software Patents From the EPO One Can Just Claim That They're 'on a Car'

    The EPO has a new 'study' (accompanied by an extensive media/PR campaign) that paints software as "SDV" if it runs on a car, celebrating growth of such software patents



  29. The Huge Cost of Wrongly-Granted European Patents, Recklessly Granted by the European Patent Office (EPO)

    It took 4 years for many thousands of people to have just one patent of Monsanto/Bayer revoked; what does that say about the impact of erroneous patent awards?



  30. Links 10/11/2018: Mesa 18.3 RC2, ‘Linux on DeX’ Beta and Windows Breaking Itself Again

    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