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

11.05.08

OOXML Convenor Might be Shooting the Messenger (Groklaw)

Posted in Microsoft, Open XML, OpenDocument at 7:33 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

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.”

Martin Bryan, Former Convenor, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC34 WG1

ALEX Brown, a major participant in Microsoft cronyism inside ISO [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22], is not so interested in facts and evidence, such as the simple observation that Microsoft is attempting to grab control ODF [1, 2, 3, 4], having attacked it viciously before.

To make matters worse, smears appear to be making a comeback [1, 2 and they came from Brown’s mouth. He not only denied the obvious but he also dismissed their source, which is typical of Microsoft employees, saying that Groklaw is “unfair”.

However, Alex Brown, the convener of SC34, told ZDNet Asia sister site ZDNet UK at the time that Jones’s post was “chock-full of misinformation and spin”.

When will the posturing end, if ever?

“…Microsoft wished to promote SCO and its pending lawsuit against IBM and the Linux operating system. But Microsoft did not want to be seen as attacking IBM or Linux.”

Larry Goldfarb, investor in SCO

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

11 Comments

  1. Alex Brown said,

    November 6, 2008 at 9:24 am

    Gravatar

    Roy Roy Roy Roy Roy,

    Look – if I wrote (and I would not) “Roy Schestowitz is an idiotic liar”, now *that* would be a personal attack, a “smear”. However, if I wrote “Roy Schestowitz’s blog entry at http://boycottnovell.com/2008/11/05/ooxml-convenor-denial/ contains idiotic lies” then that would be an attack on the *content*. Quite different. It also has the merit of being something that any reasonable person can verify for themselves by reading that content.

    Basic rule of enlightened debate: attack the piece (as much as you want), not the person. A rule you very obviously and repeatedly choose to ignore, as here.

    So when I am quoted as saying “Jones’s post was ‘chock-full of misinformation and spin’” that’s fine, and is not (as is inaccurately stated by you) a “smear”, but an attack on the a particular groklaw *post*, which was – yes – a piece of writing that was full of shit.

    - Alex.

  2. Roy Schestowitz said,

    November 6, 2008 at 9:32 am

    Gravatar

    How is a list of the participants “full of shit”?

    For the uninitiated, here is the post from Groklaw:

    http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080825162905645

  3. Alex Brown said,

    November 6, 2008 at 10:00 am

    Gravatar

    Roy

    Life is too short to correct Groklaw’s multitude of mistakes. However, as a special favour, just this once, let us consider your point about the “list of participants”.

    Groklaw stated:

    “Look at this, will you? It has a list of participants in the July meeting in Japan of the SC 34 committee”

    with a link to http://www.itscj.ipsj.or.jp/sc34/open/1055.htm for the word “this”.

    How many mistakes, of fact an analysis, can such a short sentence have? Let’s see shall we.

    First, mistakes of basic fact:

    #1 Groklaw says this was a meeting in Japan. Wrong, it was in London (read the document).

    #2 Groklaw says this was a meeting of SC 34. Wrong, it was a meeting of an “ad hoc group” open to a much wider constituency, and which was was not empowered to make decisions (it was an advisory group who could only advise its convenor – who was me).

    Second, mistakes of analysis:

    #3 Groklaw implies this proves MS controls SC 34. Wrong for two reasons: first this was not a meeting of SC 34. Second MS (and Ecma) have no votes or decision making powers in any meeting under JTC 1. (And no voting took place in any case, since this was an advisory group).

    #4 Groklaw implies MS/Ecma had some kind of untoward interest in this meeting. Errr, the purpose of this meeting was to decide on the maintenance arrangements for OOXML, so Ecma most certainly should have been interested — SC 34 had *invited* them to participate.

    If you just scale this mistake level up to the whole article, you’ll get a very good idea of its overall quality: shit.

    - Alex.

  4. twitter said,

    November 6, 2008 at 10:07 am

    Gravatar

    Enlighten me Alex. You are saying SC 34 does not want to maintain ODF? OOXML is not a laughing stock or byword for corruption?

    If you want to talk about smears, you should be familiar with your company’s other work. Here an example of a typical hit job on Roy in Slashdot. These kinds of people follow his posts on news groups and everywhere else free software advocates go. Here’s a little list of M$ abuse. There’s much more than the few people here have time to document but the spirit of things can be found in M$’s own words Directly and through proxies, M$ is one of the ugliest and most offensive companies in the world.

    Debate tip: get to the point.

  5. twitter said,

    November 6, 2008 at 10:12 am

    Gravatar

    LOL, Alex, SC 34 does not act in M$’s interest. Tell me another one, like why the world needs another document format standard after ISO approved ODF.

  6. Roy Schestowitz said,

    November 6, 2008 at 10:20 am

    Gravatar

    #1 Groklaw says this was a meeting in Japan. Wrong, it was in London (read the document).

    True, but this does not make a difference because venue is quite irrelevant to the agenda (that’s almost nitpicking). I can recall this meeting clearly because I initially read about it here.

    #3 Groklaw implies this proves MS controls SC 34. Wrong for two reasons: first this was not a meeting of SC 34. Second MS (and Ecma) have no votes or decision making powers in any meeting under JTC 1. (And no voting took place in any case, since this was an advisory group).

    Semantics and procedural details do not change the simple fact that this panel played a role in the process as a whole. Attending the meeting:

    Adam Farquhar (Ecma)
    Alex Brown (UK)
    Benjamin Henrion (BE)
    Brett Roberts (NZ)
    Dave Welsh (US)
    Doug Mahugh (Ecma)
    Francis Cave (GB)
    Isabelle Valet-Harper (Ecma)
    Istvan Sebestyen (Ecma)
    Jasper Hedegaard Bojsen (DK)
    Jean Paoli (Ecma)
    Jean Stride (GB)
    Jesper Lund Stocholm (DK)
    Jirka Kosek (CZ)
    Keld Simonsen (NO)
    Ken Holman (CA)
    Kimmo Bergius (FI)
    Manu Setälä (FI)
    Michiel Leenaars (NL)
    Murata Makoto (JP)
    Patrick Durusau (US)
    Pia Elleby Lange (DK)
    Rex Jaeschke (Ecma)
    Shahzad Rana (NO)
    Wemba Opota (CI)

    From Rob Weir:

    So a quick tally shows that there will be 25 participants, of which 12 are Ecma TC45 members (as listed) or Microsoft employees (Brett Roberts, Dave Welsh, Jasper Bojsen, Kimmo Bergius, Shahzad Rana and Wemba Opota).

    #4 Groklaw implies MS/Ecma had some kind of untoward interest in this meeting.

    That’s what ECMA is paid for, no? That’s what may define the future of multi-million-dollar products from Microsoft, no? But hey, let’s forget about the money. Microsoft and ECMA do this for the empowerment of society, I’m sure.

    Errr, the purpose of this meeting was to decide on the maintenance arrangements for OOXML, so Ecma most certainly should have been interested — SC 34 had *invited* them to participate.

    Who in SC34? And why? The quote from Martin Bryan speaks volumes. With the recent appointment of Jesper Lund Stocholm, it is clear that ISO is a lost cause. Long live OASIS.

  7. twitter said,

    November 6, 2008 at 10:47 am

    Gravatar

    Alex Brown is not an idiotic liar, but the things he writes are full shit and idiotic lies.

  8. twitter said,

    November 6, 2008 at 10:51 am

    Gravatar

    (08:44:21 AM) twitter: So, is that really Alex Brown or some impostor?
    (08:44:37 AM) schestowitz: It’s him
    (08:44:46 AM) twitter: How do you know?
    (08:44:48 AM) schestowitz: waltz.griffinbrown.co.uk

    I still can’t believe the above is really in charge of an ISO group. Someone must have baggy pants him. unless ISO has really gone down the tube lately.

  9. G. Michaels said,

    November 7, 2008 at 2:52 am

    Gravatar

    @Alex: I can’t really help you with Roy, but you can safely dismiss this ‘twitter’ person, he’s a well-known Slashdot troll and nymshifter that operates dozens of accounts over there, and uses them to disrupt discussions and general crapflooding:

    http://slashdot.org/~SockDisclosure/journal/214377

    ‘twitter’ basically appears to function now as BoycottNovell’s little attack poodle, resorting to kindergarten insults and ad hominems where Roy would rather pretend he’s being civil with people who disagree with him. They use his IRC channel to coordinate all this. Read his posts on this blog to get an idea of the quality he’s brought over from Slashdot. He’s just an unemployed armchair “evangelist” whose main achievements include getting laughed out of the Baton Rouge LUG (and Slashdot of course):

    http://www.brlug.net/pipermail/newbies_brlug.net/2007-April/001636.html

    Note: writer of this comment adds absolutely nothing but stalking and personal attacks against readers, as documented here.

  10. twitter said,

    November 7, 2008 at 11:33 am

    Gravatar

    Interesting, G. I mocked Alex Brown for calling Roy an idiot and a liar, and you took it as something aimed at yourself. Are you name shifting as you accuse me of the same?

    As Roy has noticed, that’s all you do here, so I’m force to conclude that you are simply part of M$’s regular program of abuse. Yes, that means you are paid by M$ to harass and smear people because M$’s products can’t speak for themselves.

    I’ve explained my reasons for using more than one account on Slashdot before. For those who have not seen it, visit this 2004 journal entry, this one from 2005, the troll zoo. Roy does not approve, I can live with that.

    If the person above really is Alex Brown, it’s safe to dismiss ISO. It’s long been safe to dismiss M$ for any purpose. Roy has done a good job documenting the sad destruction of ISO.

  11. André said,

    November 19, 2008 at 3:05 am

    Gravatar

    Alex is right that your communication style is over the top and you are a quick shooter to make direct personal allegations. He seems to be quite wrong on any other issues:

    #3 Groklaw implies this proves MS controls SC 34. Wrong for two reasons: first this was not a meeting of SC 34. Second MS (and Ecma) have no votes or decision making powers in any meeting under JTC 1. (And no voting took place in any case, since this was an advisory group).

    Our experience shows that it doesn’t matter in which name these persons operate. In no way does formal representation of other bodies restrain participants to directly follow the commercial interests of a particular vendor.

    The assumption that they have “no votes or decision powers in any meeting under JTC1″ is an odd presentation of facts. In particular as the past behaviour has shown that these members do not have any independence in their decision making and expertise. Sure it is not Japan that votes for its wale hunting, it is the national representative of the Bongo Bongo Islands that puts forward a proposal written by… and … says we endorse the Bongo Bongo proposal.

    #4 Groklaw implies MS/Ecma had some kind of untoward interest in this meeting. Errr, the purpose of this meeting was to decide on the maintenance arrangements for OOXML, so Ecma most certainly should have been interested — SC 34 had *invited* them to participate.

    As ECMA is de-facto a commercial proxy with no organisational independence it doesn’t matter. It just means that yet another person of the same vendor participates in the meeting under the ECMA label. This is why many persons advocate to revoke the a-liaision status of ECMA.

What Else is New


  1. Criticism of Unitary Patent (UPC) Agreement Doomed the UPC and Patent Trolls' Plan -- Along With the Litigation Lobby -- for Unified 'Extortion Vector'

    The Unitary Patent or Unified Patent Court (UPC) was the trolls' weapon against potentially millions of European businesses; but those businesses have woken up to the fact that it was against their interests and European member states such as Spain and Poland now oppose it while Germany halts ratification



  2. It Wasn't Judges With Weapons in Their Office, It Was Benoît Battistelli Who Brought Firearms to the European Patent Office (EPO)

    The EPO scandals deepen in light of a very major scandal which has occupied the French media for a couple of months



  3. Links 20/9/2018: 2018 Linux Audio Miniconference and Blackboard's Openwashing

    Links for the day



  4. Links 19/9/2018: Chromebooks Get More DEBs, LLVM 7.0.0 Released

    Links for the day



  5. Links 18/9/2018: Qt 5.12 Alpha , MAAS 2.5.0 Beta, PostgreSQL CoC

    Links for the day



  6. Today's European Patent Office (EPO) Works for Large, Foreign Pharmaceutical Companies in Pursuit of Patents on Nature, Life, and Essential/Basic Drugs

    The never-ending insanity which is patents on DNA/genome/genetics and all sorts of basic things that are put together like a recipe in a restaurant; patents are no longer covering actual machinery that accomplishes unique tasks in complicated ways, typically assembled from scratch by humans; some supposed 'inventions' are merely born into existence by the natural splitting of organisms or conception (e.g. pregnancy)



  7. The EPO Has Quit Pretending That It Cares About Patent Quality, All It Cares About is Quantity of Lawsuits

    A new interview with Roberta Romano-Götsch, as well as the EPO's promotion of software patents alongside CIPA (Team UPC), is an indication that the EPO has ceased caring about quality and hardly even pretends to care anymore



  8. Qualcomm's Escalating Patent Wars Have Already Caused Massive Buybacks (Loss of Reserves) and Loss of Massive Clients

    Qualcomm's multi-continental patent battles are an effort to 'shock and awe' everyone into its protection racket; but the unintended effect seems to be a move further and further away from 'Qualcomm territories'



  9. Links 17/9/2018: Torvalds Takes a Break, SQLite 3.25.0 Released

    Links for the day



  10. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Helps Prevent Frivolous Software Patent Lawsuits

    PTAB with its quality-improving inter partes reviews (IPRs) is enraging patent maximalists; but by looking to work around it or weaken it they will simply reduce the confidence associated with US patents



  11. Abstract Patents (Things One Can Do With Pen and Paper, Sometimes an Abacus) Are a Waste of Money as Courts Disregard Them

    A quick roundup of patents and lawsuits at the heart of which there's little or no substance; 35 U.S.C. § 101 renders these moot



  12. “Blockchain” Hype and “FinTech”-Like Buzzwords Usher in Software Patents Everywhere, Even Where Such Patents Are Obviously Bunk

    Not only the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) embraces the "blockchain" hype; business methods and algorithms are being granted patent 'protection' (exclusivity) which would likely be disputed by the courts (if that ever reaches the courts)



  13. Qualcomm's Patent Aggression Threatens Rationality of Patent Scope in Europe and Elsewhere

    Qualcomm's dependence on patent taxes (so-called 'royalties' associated with physical devices which it doesn't even make) highlights the dangers now known; the patent thicket has grown too "thick"



  14. Months After Oil States the Patent Maximalists Are Still Desperate to Crush PTAB in the Courts, Not Just in Congress and the Office

    Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) inter partes reviews (IPRs) improve patent quality and are therefore a threat to those who profit from spurious feuding and litigation; they try anything they can to turn things around



  15. IAM, Watchtroll and the EPO Still Spread the Mentality of Patent Maximalism

    The misguided idea that the objective (overall) should be to grant as many monopolies as possible (to spur a lot of litigation) isn't being challenged in echo chamber 'events', set up and sponsored by think tanks and pressure groups of the litigation 'industry'



  16. Watchtroll and Other Proponents of Patent Trolls Are Trying to Change the Law Outside the Courts in Order to Bypass Patent Justice

    35 U.S.C. § 101 (Section 101) voids almost every software patent — a reality that even the most zealous patent professionals have come to grips with and their way of tackling this ‘problem’ is legislative, albeit nowhere near successful (so far)



  17. Links 16/9/2018: Windows Plays 'Nice' Again, Elisa Music Player 0.3 Beta and Latte Dock 0.8.1

    Links for the day



  18. Slamming Courts and Judges Won't Help the Patent Maximalists; It Can Only Make Things Worse

    Acorda Therapeutics sees its stock price dropping 25% after finding out that its patent portfolio isn't solid, as affirmed by the Federal Circuitn(CAFC); the only way out of this mess is a pursuit of a vastly improved patent quality, thorough patent examination which then offers legal certainty



  19. Patent Trolls Are Still Active and Microsoft is Closely Connected to Many of Them

    A roundup of patent trolls' actions in the United States; Microsoft is connected to a notably high number of these



  20. Advancements in Automobile Technology Won't be Possible With Patent Maximalism

    Advancements in the development of vehicles are being discouraged by a thicket of patents as dumb (and likely invalid) as claims on algorithms and mere shapes



  21. Battistelli “Has Deeply Hurt the Whole Patent Profession, Examiners as Well as Agents” and Also the Image of France

    A French perspective regarding Battistelli's reign at the EPO, which has not really ended but manifests itself or 'metastasises' through colleagues of Battistelli (whom he chose) and another French President (whom he also chose)



  22. António Campinos Needs to Listen to Doctors Without Borders (MSF) et al to Salvage What's Left of Public Consent for the EPO

    Groups including Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) and Médecins du Monde (MdM) have attempted to explain to the EPO, with notoriously French-dominated leadership, that it’s a mistake to work for Gilead at the expense of the public; but António Campinos is just another patent maximalist



  23. The Max Planck Institute's Determination on UPC's (Unitary Patent) Demise is Only “Controversial” in the Eyes of Rabid Members of Team UPC

    Bristows keeps lying like Battistelli; that it calls a new paper "controversial" without providing any evidence of a controversy says a lot about Bristows LLP, both as a firm and the individuals who make up the firm (they would not be honest with their clients, either)



  24. Links 15/9/2018: Wine 3.16, Overwatch's GNU/Linux (Wine) 'Ban', New Fedora 28 Build, and Fedora 29 Beta Delay

    Links for the day



  25. Max Planck Institute Pours More Water on the Dying Unitary Patent (UPC)

    The Max Planck Institute gives another sobering reality check for Team UPC to chew on; there's still no sign of any progress whatsoever for the UPC because even Team UPC appears to have given up and moved on



  26. EPO Seals Many Death Sentences With Acceptance of EP 2604620

    Very disappointing news as EP 2604620 withstands scrutiny, assuring that a lot of poor people will not receive much-needed, life-saving treatments



  27. Links 13/9/2018: Compiz Comeback, 'Life is Strange: Before the Storm'

    Links for the day



  28. Now We Have Patents on Rooms. Yes, Rooms!

    The shallow level of what nowadays constitutes "innovation" and merits getting a patent for a couple of decades



  29. EPO Granted a Controversial European Patent (Under Battistelli) Which May Literally Kill a Lot of People

    The EPO (together with CIPA) keeps promoting software patents; patents that are being granted by the EPO literally put lives at risk and have probably already cost a lot of lives



  30. Links 13/9/2018: Parrot 4.2.2, Sailfish OS Nurmonjoki, Eelo Beta

    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